No DD today + 1.33 Open Beta feedback update

[Sete]

Cheers for the heads up, was keeping an eye out for it all day.

 

[Meglok]

Thanks! I think it hasn't been discussed yet, but there's a problem with hordes and Ming. In the new patch, the AI builds a lot of forts (which is great and gives a challenge to the game), but this makes it very hard for AI hordes to succeed against a crumbling Ming in the middle of their disaster. This is why I think giving Ming negative fort defense modifiers in their disaster (both Ming Crisis and Unguarded Nomadic Frontier), or even tie it to low mandate malus, could help hordes to claim the Mandate. Speaking of which, I would also suggest giving special priority (ai factor) to AI hordes to invade Shun the second they spawn: right now, they will only choose to intervene in the event if they have a set of conditions met, but I think they should invade unless Manchu is bankrupt. This way, you "force" Manchu to attack Shun right when they form, which is the moment they are the weakest. Another thing that prevents Qing from forming is that Manchu does not have access to the Unify China CB (if you disable Mandate of Heaven DLC you have access to it). Maybe enabling it could help Manchu to form Qing in more games.
Finally, I have a question regarding Chinese Kingdoms. Are you planning on adding a decision to Chinese Kingdoms to restore the Mandate of Heaven if it has been dismantled? There exists already a decision to do so in the game, but it is currently disabled. Thanks again!

Regarding forts, I saw just the opposite happen. Playing Oirat, once I made 2 withdrawals from the Bank of Ming they started deleting forts. I was very surprised to see Fuzhou and Canton open by 1475. Biggest problem I had was a Mingsplosion that transfered the Mandate to Shu. Had to anaconda them to kill the Mandate.

 

[Pavía]

I already made a post about it on the forum but since you are here for feedback ill put it here too. It seems that when favors and trust was reworked for Leviathan that is broke the trust system for subjects.

I have noticed that subjects' trust increases to 50 if it is below that value and then doesn't increase beyond it. Previously the trust slowly ticked towards 100 to represent a vassal trusting the overlord over time. Now because regular nations tend towards 50, I think subjects do as well.

We'll take a look about this issue.

Thanks! I think it hasn't been discussed yet, but there's a problem with hordes and Ming. In the new patch, the AI builds a lot of forts (which is great and gives a challenge to the game), but this makes it very hard for AI hordes to succeed against a crumbling Ming in the middle of their disaster. This is why I think giving Ming negative fort defense modifiers in their disaster (both Ming Crisis and Unguarded Nomadic Frontier), or even tie it to low mandate malus, could help hordes to claim the Mandate. Speaking of which, I would also suggest giving special priority (ai factor) to AI hordes to invade Shun the second they spawn: right now, they will only choose to intervene in the event if they have a set of conditions met, but I think they should invade unless Manchu is bankrupt. This way, you "force" Manchu to attack Shun right when they form, which is the moment they are the weakest. Another thing that prevents Qing from forming is that Manchu does not have access to the Unify China CB (if you disable Mandate of Heaven DLC you have access to it). Maybe enabling it could help Manchu to form Qing in more games.
Finally, I have a question regarding Chinese Kingdoms. Are you planning on adding a decision to Chinese Kingdoms to restore the Mandate of Heaven if it has been dismantled? There exists already a decision to do so in the game, but it is currently disabled. Thanks again!

We're working on addressing AI fort spamming issue. We're also taking a further look on buffing Manchu a bit to improve its chances of creating Qing, although it's not an easy fix, TBH.

Please could you make it possible to turn trade companies into colonial nations? (And possibly vice versa). This happened in the game’s timeframe when the Dutch East India company was nationalised, as well as the formation of British Raj.

The ability could enable at Diplo Tech 23

We're not planning on making any changes regarding this, and it doesn't look to be very popular, TBH.

Suggestion for Manchu-Korea tributary event

We have new event about making Korea as Manchu’s tributary in 1.33. And i have suggestion for this event! This event's current option for Korea is 1. Maintaining as Ming's tributary 2. Become Manchu's tributary (AI choose this 100%, although...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

Suggestion for Manchu-Korea tributary event

Thanks, we'll take a look on it.

@Pavía

- Can no longer annihilate powerful AI enemies through multiple peace deals with all of your allies as they'll unconditionally surrender if on -100% war score and won't accept any other peace offers until the war leader has peaced out. Also, when forts are reverted back to owner after a peace treaty their garrisons are refilled.

Could ye consider tweaking this please so that unconditional surrender only occurs when the war leader has allies in the war?
It's really annoying being hit with war exhaustion now when I couldn't even use this 'exploit'.

As to your very first point, this is intended and using allied nations to decimate a large enemy like that was considered an exploit. War exhaustion is supposed to be something that you experience and manage throughout the game. Its meant to be an impediment and hindrance, alike corruption, and your annoyance is a testament to their change working as intended.

This.

Could you look at innovative, maritime and aristocratic ideas, which have been nerfed by the leader upkeep change?

Maritime Ideas will actually receive some boost in the final 1.33 patch. Rebalancing idea groups is something we've been working on in the past months.

Would it be possible to collect together the replies you give today into a single thread and sticky it somewhere for ease of reading? We could even call that the DD for today.

Already done.

Could you revert the cb change? Especially for things like subject independence wars it makes some hard start runs significantly harder.

As answered in other post: "We've made some changes to the CB balance. Right now, you have to use the primary goal set for each CB first as a peace request (let's say, Independence). Then, you can use the remaining Warscore up to 100% for other peace requests (provinces, etc.)."

not exactly beta related but an idea poped in "our" mind, how about making crimea a tributary for the ottomans. would block one otoman blob path for some time.

This is something we already have in our minds to try to balance a bit more the Ottoblob in the next patch.

No problem! Any word on the small Emperor IA issue? (Where Hesse and others get the HRE but then can't pass any reforms due to them being too small)

At the moment this is WAD, although we're open to balance it if it's seen as a problem widely in the community.

No worries, thank you for your hard work!

I would like to ask about the centers of refomation being tied to the center of a religious group in common/religion/00_religion.txt. Would it be possible to remove this restriction or at least give us the modders a way around it? For example, there is currently no way to spawn Christian centers of reformation anywhere outside of Europe. Removing this restriction would open up many possibilities for mods. Thank you!

Maybe, I'm adding this suggestions to the list of possible modding changes for the next patch.

Thank you @Pavía for your update. One thing that I'm still curious about is the subject interaction "Start War in Colony" bug which was already reported (bug report) since December last year but has not yet been reviewed or had any response from the dev team, and still happened in 1.33 beta. Actually, it has been asked since May 2021 that the colony cannot start the war with other colonies no matter what type of colony they are.

Is this WAD? Otherwise, it is very conflicting with the description of Start War in Colony that explained "Makes your Colonial nation start a war against another colonial nation or natives". Not sure why this issue hadn't been touched upon since the interaction "colony declare independence war" had already been solved in 1.33 beta.

I also attach the picture here that shows my Spanish La Plata (self-governing type) cannot declare war on Portuguese Brazil (crown colony) with a confusing text "Self-governing colony can't fight their own wars".

View attachment 803660

We'll take a look over this issue.

 

[Mindel]

Maritime Ideas will actually receive some boost in the final 1.33 patch. Rebalancing idea groups is something we've been working on in the past months.

On the topic of idea groups, one of the pulse events for Innovative is a stab hit due to "spreading of humanist ideas". Maybe it would be a better idea to move this event over to Humanism.

It seems unfair that a much stronger idea group like Humanism has no stab hit event, while a weaker group like Innovative gets the extra insult to injury of a stab hit, in which the text even attributes to humanism.

 

[Mindel]

t the moment this is WAD, although we're open to balance it if it's seen as a problem widely in the community.

I would recommend here that the design be changed and the malus be reduced, if not removed entirely. Personally, I would also increase the weight of diplomatic reputation, opinion, and other "diplomatic" factors.

The HRE is one of the few places where one can focus exclusively on tall play and hope to remain competitive in the late game (by reforming your way to revoking the privilegia). But the weak emperor malus effectively bars this from happening unless you expand (into fellow HRE nations) to a certain size, which is at odds with the tall/diplomatic themes that the HRE embodies. It's presence thus prevents an interesting playstyle which would otherwise be a viable alternative to the typical wide strategy.

In short, adding "wide" requirements to reforming conflicts with the tall theme of the HRE.

 

[Mindel]

Maritime Ideas will actually receive some boost in the final 1.33 patch. Rebalancing idea groups is something we've been working on in the past months.

I hope something has been done to make Innovative and Espionage more attractive. Although at the moment I'm not sure what could persuade me to choose them.

More powerful policies for Innovative would be nice. The theme of creativity resulting in powerful synergies with all of your other idea groups would be a very interesting twist to the usual method of measuring an idea group by just its ideas.

 

[Noble Steel]

I hope something has been done to make innovative and espionage more attractive. Although at the moment I'm not sure what could persuade me to choose them...

I would appreciate if u read my 2 threads on Espionage and share thoughts, I tried my best to make them attractive

 

[ArtFart]

At the moment this is WAD, although we're open to balance it if it's seen as a problem widely in the community.

Hmm, fair enough. Seems just a bit odd that a lot of my games I see Hesse take the HRE and then the HRE is basically stagnant for the entire game.

 

[Rudolf Nechvile II]

I was wondering, since you guys are tweaking the AI a bit, could you guys maybe tweak where the AI prioritises colonisation? I mostly see Portugal taking Mexico the Caribbean, Peru and La Plata, while Spain is often the one who takes Brazil. Perhaps if you could make the AI prioritise more based off of the mission trees, if you don't want to just railroad them for colonising certain regions.

Also, since you are tweaking the placement of the PU Portugal mission in the Spanish tree, could perhaps also please have a look at these suggestions:

Since the devs are willing to update the mission trees a bit and are already tweaking the Spanish missions, I would just like to suggest two minor changes.

My problem lies specifically with two missions: "Expel the Moriscos" and "Spanish Netherlands". Both of which are somewhat ahistorical to different degrees.

The problem with the former is that it was intended to make use of the controversial Expel Minority mechanic that came with Golden Century. However, that mechanic has changed a bit and the mission is now rather useless. Furthermore, Andalusians ≠ Moriscos, so it makes no sense to expel a culture that is around today.

The problem with the latter is just that it is mildly ahistorical, in that it requires you to also own the Bishopric of Liége. Liége was never part of the Spanish or later Austrian Netherlands and it just makes for annoying gameplay if I want to stay allied to the emperor. I would suggest either removing the requirement to also own Liége; however, I believe a more elegant and perhaps easier to implement solution would just be to change the requirement to "control X number of provinces in the Low Countries. This way it could also account for a slightly diminished Burgundy before the inheritance, and not force you into war either.

Edit: One last minor change I would like to see would be with the "Continue Reconquista" mission. I don't think it's as much a priority as the other two, but if the devs go through with not allowing you to take land with the restoration of Union CB, please allow "or owned by direct subject" completion requirement to the mission as well. Currently if you PU Portugal through the tree, you won't be able to fulfill the mission without a conquest war first, because they own Ceita at game start. A better solution to the whole taking land thing would perhaps be to allow you to take land you claim and cores too when you restore PUs, or just use the existing unjustified demands mechanic and up the penalty.

And finally, are you guys planning on implementing a way to merge colonial nations in the same region, say after integrating/inheriting a PU? Perhaps the PU subject's CNs could revert to the overlord first, like in annexation and then automatically revert to the CN subject as usual. Alternatively this could be by event? But I think the formed is better if the CN is spilling into another region and maybe even easier to implement.

P.S. it would also be nice if CNs would prioritise colonisation in their own regions, you know, clean borders and all

 

[So_MeOne]

Hello. I've just made a post in the "1.33 beta" thread, but just in case, i'll post it here too.
Here it is:

Hello there! Thank You for implementing so many of the community's suggestions.

I think I've found an issue in the beta.
When requesting in the peace deal realease of two or more tags with some overlapping core provinces, game differently displays borders of those nations during the peace deal and after it.

For example:

Spoiler

View attachment 803758
I clicked Shu first, Xi second. Game map shows that only Xi is getting released, while summary says that Shu and Xi are both getting released.

Spoiler

View attachment 803759
In the end, they both got released.

Also, I have a question on another topic. The event "The Prussian Confederation Revolts" (event id: flavor_teu.1) can only trigger after year 1460. Historically, Prussian Confederation rebelled against the Teutonic Order back in 1454, starting the Thirteen Years' War (1454–1466).

Spoiler

View attachment 803784
View attachment 803794
testevent flavor_teu.1

Spoiler

View attachment 803790

Thirteen Years' War (1454–1466) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Prussian Confederation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Since the in-game "after 1460" date isn't historically accurate, can we expect just a little change, moving the event's earliest possible date few years earlier?

 

[liniMusso]

Ok idk if it's intended but if you form italy while you are the hre you'll lose the empire status

 

[Krebsig]

Speaking of QoL and improvements for the next patch; there is a great mod there that adds dynamic province names for colonies in regards to almost all common colonizers in the game: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1375379791
Sadly, the mod hasn't been updated recently , but I feel I'd be a great and somewhat easy addition to add more flavor to the game.

 

[wkscrombie]

Greetings! As we're busy going through all the feedback we're receiving from you in the 1.33 Open Beta, and making further fixes and improvements from all the issues reported, we don't really have any new content to show today. However, I'll go this evening through some of the threads where you've posted this feedback, and try to answer as much comments as possible, to give you updated and more detailed info about how we're doing with them.

If you want to post here more feedback, you're welcome, although I'll ask you to avoid reposting/repeating about some of the more shared issues (AI fort spamming, CB balancing, etc.), as I'll already answer to those in the other threads.

Adding answers to 1.33 Open Beta feedback:

EUIV: 1.33 Opt-in Beta Patch now Available on Steam!

Greetings!;) We are currently working on the 1.33 patch and we'd like to invite you all to get an early peek into the patch while it’s undergoing testing and give additional feedback on it before the final release. This patch is targeting bug...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

Europa Universalis IV - Development Diary 1st of February 2022

Hello everyone, and welcome to another EUIV Dev Diary! Today we’ll be talking about more changes we’ve been doing for the 1.33 ‘France’ patch, one new concept that we’ve implemented called ‘Script Debt’, and the workflow behind bugfixing. So...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

Ah, I was wondering why I didn’t see the dev diary earlier. No worries!


While I’m here, though, a quick question/request: there’s this weird arbitrary restriction that you can’t convert to pagan religions, even if religious rebels enforce demands with more than half of your provinces/development, unless that religion is animist. Could that be removed? If you’re jumping through all the hoops to turn Tengri or whatever, it seems like it’s kind of a bizarrely unnecessary step to have to find an animist province and let them convert you first.

Also, just another little balance thing with pagan religions— could you make it so Zoroastrianism could use pagan monuments? It seems odd to me that they’re unable to use the pyramids, which were controlled by the Achaemenids at the height of Persia’s power, but some random animist tribe from Sulawesi can.

 

[Blindbohemian]

Hmm, fair enough. Seems just a bit odd that a lot of my games I see Hesse take the HRE and then the HRE is basically stagnant for the entire game.

To be fair it's a bit more odd that in the vast majority of games the HRE is extremely dynamic, whereas "stagnant" or "slow decline" is a fairly good description of the HRE's trajectory in real life.

 

[coorta19]

Hi there.

Do you plan to decrease (or is some occasions remove) penalty to professionalism after recruitment of mercenary unit ? As I was playing as Hungary yesterday and I realised that black army (as a mercenary unit) is in reality described as one of the first professional/permanent armies in Europe (at its peak around 20 000 men). And first units of permanent army of Habsburg empire (after end of 30 years war) were mercenary units, which were kept in service even after war ended. Mercenary units (not all of them of course) were definitively more disciplined (if payed well enough) and skilled than any contemporary levies and therefore it is weird to see recruiting one reduce professionalism.

Maybe at least reduce "damage" to professionalism after recruiting mercenary unit to 1-2 depending on size of unit ?

 

[currylambchop]

Apparently Cossack recruited from macro builder doesn’t cost manpower (like streltsy in 1.32

 

[coorta19]

Another thing that I realised is that often AI keeps alliances that are absurd after certain time (I´m not saying that those alliances are not good at the start of game) - for example 500-600 development france keeping alliance with Brittany/Provence (which it can easily defeat and annex) and not once through entire game they attempted to seize it despite being in the same culture group. The same thing more than once happened with Muscovy and Ryazan aand with Ryazan being one of requirements for forming Russia (I know that Smolensk is alternative, but ai is rarely able to go against Lithuania as 99 percent of time it falls under PU of Poland) it means that Russia never forms through entire game (despite again Muscovy being easily able to break alliance, wait for truce to expire and than annex them in a single war).

Similar thing I observed with Ottomans keeping alliance in Karaman despite them being 1000 development power and Karaman being 5 province minor nation.

What I want is that after gaining certain ammount of development ai should be able to "renonsider" its alliances and break off alliances with nations that
1.are in the same culture group
2.are much weaker than themselves
(with some tweaks to situation in the HRE as nations in it can not do the same things as nations outside of it)

If my ai ally can suddenly become domineering against me (via gaining pu claim) despite me being about 2 times stronger, it should be possible to change ai behaviour mentioned above.

 

[coorta19]

After playing game as Hungary and cetralizing empire achievement Take that von Habsburg became unavailable with HRE forming. I don´t think that game should prevent you from getting that achievement as I was able to become member of the HRE and elector via Hungarian mission tree with being emperor and centralizing empire next logical step.

 

[edalen]

As emperor of china it seems like you can use the "Convert tributary to vassal" diplomatic action on any country. Even countries that are not your tributaries, or vassals of other countries etc.

 

[El_Cid_]

As to your very first point, this is intended and using allied nations to decimate a large enemy like that was considered an exploit. War exhaustion is supposed to be something that you experience and manage throughout the game. Its meant to be an impediment and hindrance, alike corruption, and your annoyance is a testament to their change working as intended.

@Noble Steel @Pavía
Did either of ye read my post properly? I was referring to wars that one fights without calling in any allies.
Immediately being hit with call for peace on 100% ing them is BS.