• 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.

Europa Universalis IV - Development Diary 26th of July 2022

Hello everyone! Today I’ll introduce you to the new monuments we’ve designed for the next update. As before, this content will be free for all Leviathan DLC owners. Along with that, I’ll also comment on some game balance changes we’ve implemented for free in the 1.34 update.

New Monuments

As already mentioned in some of the previous DDs, we decided to introduce a few more monuments. Overall, we’re happy with the monument density we got after the 1.32 update, so we just wanted to address one specific region that was lacking in love (Scandinavia, which fits in pretty well with the upcoming DLC), and a few gaps we wanted to cover here and there. Since we had few monuments to cover this time, we also tried to get creative with the attached modifiers (you may notice some new modifiers on them, also). Let’s see:

The Falun Copper Mine was already present in the game, as a local modifier to the province of Dalaskogen. As it was the main copper production site for Europe in the Modern Age, we decided to turn it into a monument (and for those not owning Leviathan, the local province modifier will stay as it is).

great_project_falun_copper_mine.jpg

Modifiers:

Tier 1Tier 2Tier 3
Local modifiers:
+3 Local Goods Produced

Area modifiers:
−5% Local construction cost
−5% Local construction time
Local modifiers:
+6 Local Goods Produced

Area modifiers:
−10% Local construction cost
−10% Local construction time

Global modifiers:
-10% Artillery cost
Local modifiers:
+9 Local Goods Produced

Area modifiers:
−20% Local construction cost
−20% Local construction time

Global modifiers:
-20% Artillery cost

Built by King Erik VII in the early 15th century, Kronborg Castle was established to enforce the Sound Toll, though it would later be transformed into a magnificent royal residence.

great_project_kronborg.jpg

Modifiers:

Tier 1Tier 2Tier 3
Local modifiers:
+15% Local defensiveness

Global modifiers:
+25% Navy tradition from protecting trade

When upgraded:
+1 Mercantilism
Local modifiers:
+25% Local defensiveness
+1 Naval combat local bonus off owned coast

Global modifiers:
+50% Navy tradition from protecting trade

When upgraded:
+3 Mercantilism
Local modifiers:
+33% Local defensiveness
+2 Naval combat local bonus off owned coast

Global modifiers:
+100% Navy tradition from protecting trade

When upgraded:
+6 Mercantilism

The city of Visby was one of the main ports on the Baltic trade routes, its walls protected it from its many enemies, making it the heart of an independent Gotland.

great_project_visby_city.jpg

Modifiers:

Tier 1Tier 2Tier 3
Local modifiers:
-25% Local shipbuilding time
+50% Hostile disembark time

Global modifiers:
+20% Privateer efficiency
Local modifiers:
-33% Local shipbuilding time
+100% Hostile disembark time

Global modifiers:
+33% Privateer efficiency
+15% Domestic trade power
Local modifiers:
-50% Local shipbuilding time
+200% Hostile disembark time

Global modifiers:
+50% Privateer efficiency
+25% Domestic trade power

Trakai Island Castle was completed in the early 15th century by Grand Duke Vytautas, first for a military purpose and later transformed into a royal residence.

great_project_trakai_castle.jpg

Modifiers:

Tier 1Tier 2Tier 3
Local modifiers:
+10% Local manpower modifier

Global modifiers:
+0.25 Yearly prestige
+0.5 Monthly splendor
+5% Reform progress growth
Local modifiers:
+15% Local manpower modifier

Global modifiers:
+0.5 Yearly prestige
+1 Monthly splendor
+10% Reform progress growth
+1 Possible advisors
Local modifiers:
+25% Local manpower modifier

Global modifiers:
+1 Yearly prestige
+2 Monthly splendor
+20% Reform progress growth
+2 Possible advisors

Salvador da Bahia was one of the oldest cities established by the Portuguese in Brazil, becoming the capital of the colony for more than two centuries.

great_project_salvador_da_bahia.jpg

Modifiers:

Tier 1Tier 2Tier 3
Local modifiers:
+10 Local trade power

Global modifiers:
+10% Global trade power
+10 Global settler increase
Local modifiers:
+15 Local trade power

Global modifiers:
+10% Global trade power
+10 Global settler increase
+0.25 Goods produced
Local modifiers:
+25 Local trade power

Global modifiers:
+10% Global trade power
+10 Global settler increase
+0.5 Goods produced

M'banza-Kongo was the seat of Manikongo, the ruler of the Kingdom of Kongo, becoming the most important city in the region during the 15th and 16th centuries, as the power of its king prospered.

great_project_mbanza_kongo.jpg

Requirements:
Culture is in Kongo group and is accepted by its owner

Modifiers:

Tier 1Tier 2Tier 3
Global modifiers:
+20% Institution spread in true faith provinces
+10% Reform progress growth
Global modifiers:
+33% Institution spread in true faith provinces
+15% Reform progress growth
+0.5 Yearly legitimacy
Global modifiers:
+50% Institution spread in true faith provinces
+20% Reform progress growth
+1 Yearly legitimacy
Allow Estate Privileges to be revoked regardless of loyalty and influence

The historic city of Harar Jugol was one of the main places of pilgrimage for Muslims, with dozens of mosques and shrines, and a tradition of scholars and holy men.

great_project_harar_jugol.jpg

Requirements:
Province has the state or syncretic religion, which is in Muslim group.

Modifiers:

Tier 1Tier 2Tier 3
Local modifiers:
+0.25 Institution Growth

Global modifiers:
+0.1 Prestige per development from missionary
Local modifiers:
+0.25 Institution Growth

Global modifiers:
+0.2 Prestige per development from missionary
-10% Stability cost modifier
Local modifiers:
+0.5 Institution Growth

Global modifiers:
+0.3 Prestige per development from missionary
-25% Stability cost modifier

When upgraded:
Unlocks decision which allow to embrace Legalism at below -50 Piety and Mysticism above 50 Piety

Dujiangyan is related to the ancient irrigation system developed around the city of the same name, and how it made the Sichuan region one of the most prosperous in China.

great_project_dujiangyan.jpg

Modifiers:

Tier 1Tier 2Tier 3
Local modifiers:
-20% Province governing cost
-5% Development efficiency

Area modifiers:
-0.05 Monthly devastation
Local modifiers:
-10% Development efficiency
+1 Possible number of buildings

Area modifiers:
-20% Province governing cost

Region modifiers:
-0.05 Monthly devastation
Area modifiers:
-40% Province governing cost
-10% Development efficiency
+1 Possible number of buildings

Global modifiers:
-0.05 Monthly devastation



Idea groups & Policies rebalance

We already talked in previous DDs about the new national ideas that we developed for some countries. Along with that, we decided to rebalance some of the existing idea groups. The general design behind this rebalance was to give again a bit of extra diversity to the different groups available, so choosing different possibilities between them might be more viable from this update. Getting into more detail, here are some of the reasoning behind specific changes:
  • Ideas giving National Manpower and Land Force limit are nerfed, to combine them with the new changes in the combat system. We felt that there were already many different sources of Manpower and Land Force available to the player and that also some ideas (e.g. Quantity) were heavily favored over others.
  • We’re also nerfing both the Economic Ideas and the Economic-Quality Policy Development Cost reduction, as we felt that we already introduced a fair amount of Development Cost elsewhere, so we saw it right to reduce it considerably here, effectively rebalancing the total amount you get from these sources.
  • We wanted to buff some of the underdogs in the Idea Groups, such as Espionage, Trade and Naval, to make them more viable compared to others in their groups.
Here you’ve got a detailed account of the changes implemented:
  • Innovative Ideas:
    • ‘Optimism’ gives now also gives +1 Leaders without Upkeep.
    • 'Formalized Officer Corps' replaced by ‘Expanded Policies’, now granting +1 Free Policies.
  • Economic Ideas:
    • Bonus now gives -10% Development Cost instead of -20%.
  • Espionage Ideas:
    • ‘State Propaganda’ now also reduces Covert Action Relation Impact by -50%.
    • ‘Vetting’ now also grants -0.1 Yearly Corruption.
    • ‘Audit Checks’ replaced by ‘Blackmailing’, now granting:
      • Reasons to Accept Vassalization +15.
      • Monthly Favors Modifier +33%.
    • Bonus gives now Rebel Support Efficiency of 100% instead of just 50%, and reduces Covert Action Relation Impact by -50%.
  • Trade Ideas
    • ‘Shrewd Commerce Practice’ now also decreases Promote Mercantilism Cost by 25%.
    • ‘Free Trade’ now also gives +2 Merchant Trade Power.
    • ‘Overseas Merchants’ now also decreases Trade Company Investment Cost by 25%.
    • Bonus now also gives +10% Loyalty of the Burghers/Vaisyas
  • Exploration Ideas:
    • ‘Free Colonies’ now gives +10% Settler Chance.
    • ‘Global Empire’ now also gives +25% Treasure Fleet Income.
  • Aristocratic Ideas:
    • ‘Noble Knights’ gives now -20% Cavalry Cost instead of 10% and +15% Cavalry Combat Ability instead of 10%.
    • ‘Serfdom’ now gives +20% National Manpower Modifier instead of +33%.
    • ‘Noble Connections’ now increases mercenary manpower by 25% instead of 20%.
  • Divine Ideas:
    • ‘Martyrs’ gives now +25% Manpower in True Faith provinces instead of +15% Global Manpower modifier.
  • Horde Ideas:
    • Bonus now also gives +10% Tribes Loyalty Equilibrium.
  • Indigenous Ideas:
    • ‘Controlled Burns’ from Indigenous Ideas gives now +15% National Manpower Modifier instead of +20%
  • Offensive Ideas:
    • ‘Grand Army’ now gives +10% Special Unit Force Limit and +15% Land Force Limit Modifier instead of 20% Land Force Limit Modifier.
  • Quality Ideas:
    • ‘Quality Education’ now also gives +0.5 Navy Tradition.
  • Quantity Ideas:
    • ‘Levée en Masse’ now gives +33% National Manpower Modifier instead of 50%.
    • Bonus now gives +33% Land Force Limit Modifier instead of +50%.
  • Naval Ideas:
    • ‘Naval Glory’ now also gives +1 Impact on Siege.
    • ‘Oak Forests for Ships’ now also gives +10% Ship Durability.
    • Bonus now gives -100% Naval Barrage Cost instead of +10% Ship Durability.
Policies:
  • Economic - Quantity:
    • No longer gives -10% Development Cost, instead it gives -5% Land Maintenance Modifier.
  • Innovative - Quality:
    • Now gives Infantry Combat Ability +15% instead of +10%.
  • Aristocratic - Espionage:
    • Now gives Cavalry Combat Ability +15% instead of +10%, and +10% Noble Estate Loyalty Equilibrium.


Crownland & Government Reform Progress

You may know that it was commented by my colleagues @PDX Big Boss and @Ogele that we replaced the tax modifier from high crownland with Reform progress growth, but for those who don’t follow as much in detail the DDs, here is a kind reminder of it:

1657651615437.png

We made an additional change to this: now each Crownland Level above 50% Crownland increases Reform Progress Growth (the modifier, not the flat value) by 20%, up from the current 10%, so the final amount of RPG you can get at 100% Crownlands is 100%. And we’ve also lowered the subsequent reform growth cost from 50 to 40. This makes for more consistent growth of RP, making it easier to progress through the expanded tiers of Government Reforms.



Governing Capacity

Along with the above change, we also decided that we could make Reform Progress Growth even more strategic, by adding a malus to Administrative Efficiency if being over the Governing Capacity - which is something that can be countered either by the Centralize State mechanic or by getting more Gov. Cap. with buildings, monuments, reforms, etc. This will certainly curb growth speed, but we think that this also adds some more depth to the game because it presents the player with the choice of how to get extra Gov. Cap. from the different features from where it can be expanded, but also an additional “How do I spend my precious Government Reform Progress” because it can be used either on the ‘Centralize State’ mechanic or in getting more Government Reforms.

Thus, the change we implemented is adding -1% Administrative Efficiency for every 2% Governing Capacity above the cap. This way it scales logically and gives off a dynamic and natural effect on the expansion speed of the country in question.

Adm..jpg

To help adjust the Governing Capacity, we made that Courthouses and Town Halls no longer require an open building slot to be constructed, similar to how Universities work, making them a more interesting type of building. Additionally, the State House building now no longer requires an open building slot, and now decreases local governing cost by a percentage of 25% and a flat -25. These governing modifiers are doubled when constructed on a Paper, Gems or Glass province.



Other Miscellaneous Changes

Aside from that, we've implemented a few more changes here and there, which we're covering in this miscellaneous section, as we think they might be of interest:

  • Slackening for Manpower now only gives 1 year worth of manpower instead of 2 years.
  • Expanding the Infrastructure of a province now increases local development cost by -25% instead of -5%. We decided against using Development Efficiency because it could end up at 0 Dev Cost for a province
  • Ramparts give 1 Combat Roll Bonus for the defender.
  • Pagan religious rebels can now force you to convert to their religion if the majority of your country has this religion. Nahuatl, Mayan and Ican are excluded from it due to their "primitive" status in the game.
  • If you have Mare Nostrum then the Spy Network in a foreign country will decrease AE Impact in that nation by -30% instead of -10%
  • Support Rebels now costs 30% Spy Network instead of 60%
  • Scorched Earth now causes +0.25 Local Monthly Devastation alongside the -50% Hostile Movement Speed for 5 years
  • Devotion now gives +25% Church Power, 25% Harmonization Speed, 0.001 Monthly Piety Accelerator, 0.5 Yearly Authority, 0.1% Yearly Patriarchal Authority, 0.5 Yearly Doom Reduction, 0.05 Yearly Karma Decay and 0.05% Clergy/Brahmins Loyalty Equilibrium additionally to the Papal Influence, Prestige and Global Tax modifiers
    Note: this change has been added to make Theocracies more fitting for other religions too.
  • Crimea now becomes a Tributary State of the Ottomans instead of a March when they seek Ottoman protection during the "Fate of the Crimean Khanate" event.

There were a lot of things to cover today! Please let us know of any feedback you have regarding these changes, as we feel today's DD is more about engaging with the community on balance changes than any other. Also, keep in mind that the numbers presented still have room for improvement, so please stay civil in discussing them. Next week the DD will be all about the great art our team has been working on for the upcoming DLC, brought to you by @SaintDaveUK . See you!
 

Attachments

  • great_project_mbanza_kongo.jpg
    great_project_mbanza_kongo.jpg
    105,8 KB · Views: 0
  • 127Like
  • 44Love
  • 19
  • 15
  • 7
Reactions:
No, but I think I can sneak this one into the update if @Pavía doesn't look.

Speaking of misplaced idea group events, the "Our cause is just" event granting -20% AE is still filed under Influence, even though the AE reduction idea was moved from there to Espionage some time ago. I assume this is an oversight.

It seems that no one has gone through the list of idea group pulse events to update them and account for all of the changes that have been made in idea groups for some time, such as moving ideas from one group to another. Usually any related pulse event or policy gets left behind. I think this inspection should be done before the new DLC releases. The same review should also be done for policies.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
First of all, thanks for all the kind comments that this DD has received - and they've been quite a lot, more than 300 at this point. I'll try to answer as much as possible but take into account that we can't respond to everything and that this also takes some time. In addition, we've been working the whole week on testing and tweaking the balance changes according to the feedback we've received, but we also have some QA tests left to be done on them. So expect that in a couple of weeks I'll present an almost-final version of the Idea group numbers as an addition to the planned DD. Also, I want to point out that a constructive, civil tone favors debate, so thanks for that, and please let's keep that tone.



-5 devastation for Tier 3 too low i guess. simple fortress give a more strong bonus
Take into account that it's a global modifier.
I quite like most of these changes, but i do feel that Norway was kinda left out of your "love" for this pack, because Norway do have some monuments that should be worth putting in the game, most spesifically Bryggen from Bergen that was one the most important harbours in medieval Euorpe and was still an important harbour in the 15th century as well. Why was it not decided to put in any new monuments in Norway who was alrealy quite lacking on that front anyway?
Norway was the only Scandinavian country already having a monument. Take into account that if you form Scandinavia, you just have 4 monuments with no requirements at hand to be used.
I am a little bit concerned about the changes to development costs in the idea groups, in that they might be balanced around mechanics only available through DLC. If the thought is that there is more development growth through consolidating or landmarks, people who don't have the DLC are kind of pushed away from tall play.
Yes it is. In general, more dlc == more ridiculous total dev cost reduction gets
@Pavía If we’re only getting a potential -10% dev cost from picking eco instead of the potential -30% that we have now, I feel like it should be something different so that it is actually impactful. A fun idea I had as finisher could be to give 5% dev efficiency and reduce the requirements for expand infrastructure so that you can do it more often ex. (every 10 dev instead of 15) I feel like this will be much more impactful for tall nations while severely limiting its impact for wide nations as they really cannot expand infrastructure now that they will lose a ton of admin efficiency which would not be worth it for them in that play style.

Edit: Also, now that gov capacity has the admin efficiency debuff so large nations realistically cannot use it much, maybe the other modifiers for expand administration could be buffed as well ex. more local trade efficiency/defensiveness/tax/manpower/etc. Make expand administration the tall mechanic it was meant to be and now can be!
Honestly. A lot of those -dev cost modifiers you claim to have been giving out are gated behind the recent DLCs
The Economic group nerf means that the only reason to ever take it is for the discipline policy, which is a questionable decision from your side
Quantity and Aristocracy manpower nerfs mean that it will be significantly harder for everyone to develop realistic manpower pools by the end game, and it's not like Aristocracy was an overwhelmingly powerful group anyways
+ special forces limit has to be compensated for somehow for nations without them, it's kind of ridiculous to give out some nations a freebie while screwing over the others
I'm not really a fan of the changes, personally

Edit: Credit where credit is due, Innovative changes are nice
On the other hand, Espionage is still horribly useless and Trade buffs are questionable, considering its one of the strongest idea groups for eco
There will be still plenty of Dev Cost reduction and Dev Eff (a new modifier, name still has to be decided) out of DLC mechanics, as in government reforms, estates, etc. But we also have to make balance changes thinking about having all DLCs turned on, so I can understand your concern. For instance, we've decided to spread out a -5% Dev Cost in all the Military ideas related to the government form (Aristocratic, Plutocratic and Divine; Indigenous already had, and Hordes have their own mechanics for dev).
> Expanded Policies

I dont see that on the innovative idea group at all.
Fixed in the DD, thanks.
How does the Salvador de Bahia monument's T2-T3 effect on +goods produced work? Because if it gives straight + goods produced on a province, T3 is equivalent to +2.5 production dev on EVERY single province. Isn't that a lot or am I just exaggerating? SA has ~250 provinces, multiply it by 2.5 extra prod. dev, multiply by 3(trade good price) to get the yearly extra production income = 1875. Let's say provinces have autonomy and lower it to yearly extra 1000 ducats just from production income. Upgrade to T3 costs a total of 8500 ducats (and some time). To me, it seems so good that taking loans and maxing it out is reasonable even if you haven't conquered all the continent.
Brazilian from Salvador here, pleasantly surprised that the city made an appearance as a wonder, just a minor heads up - it's spelled without the acute accent ("Bahia" and not "Bahía") in Portuguese. I believe the accent would theoretically be used in Spanish, but the city was never under Spanish control bar the technicalities surrounding the Iberian Union.
I love a lot of this, but a few of the numbers definately need some tweaks. Most notably, +0.5 global goods produced might be the most insanely overpowered number I've ever seen on this website, and I was around for the Leviathan launch. In economic terms, it effectively gives +2.5 free diplo dev to every province, and it's a modifier that will be applied in a region with a lot of gold mines.
Love the changes overall, but reading through this thread it does seem like a mistake to not have another look at the Salvador da Bahia monument before launch. First off get rid of the accent on Bahia, but more importantly rethink the incentives created by putting OP monuments in colonial regions that don't affect the overlord. Outside of niche situations, it's generally not good gameplay to be specifically incentivized to avoid forming or acquiring colonial nations.

Either nerf the monument so the incentive goes away (honestly global .5 goods produced reads like a typo, like it was supposed to be 5% or supposed to be regional), make monuments affects the overlord as well, or just say screw it and make colonial nations optional without capital moving shenanigans. I'd go for the 1st option personally.
+0.5 Goods produced
Not sure if this is a good idea since this will be a GLOBAL modifier. I like everything else though! Great update.
You're correct, this was an overlook on our behalf (we were always thinking of the design as an interesting monument affecting the Brazilian region), so we're fixing the monument, so now the Goods Produced modifier will be affecting a Region scope (Brazil itself), instead of a Global one.

Also, 'Bahía' was a Spanish-spelling mistake made by me in the DD, in-game it's correctly shown as 'Bahia'.
Can you specify which monuments have which tier in the start date? I think it's important. Also, I can't see the changed ''Expanded Policies'' which gives 1 free policies anywhere in Innovative.
All the new monuments start at Tier 1, except Salvador da Bahia and M'Banza-Kongo, which start at Tier 0.
Please also make federations no longer be able to join federations! It results in absolute silly large north american natives and doesn't make a lot of sense or for fun colonizing gameplay!
This problem is already fixed for the 1.34 update. We've also made some more additional fixes to the Native Federations.
Im pleased generally, but also have some mixed feelings

Positive
  • Ramparts buff is much needed and approved of, they were easily skippable if you could stack 5 attrition on lategame sieges anyway with volume of troops + terrain + defensive, plus detracted from building factories for trade + strategic good benefit, altering dice rolls makes holding and attacking the site more difficult as intended and will be great for chokepoints. Little OP for Russia though who's going to probably be MP king this patch.

  • Expand infrastructure is extra tempting to helping the tall playstyle in its newer form for the ultra effective Othodox Metropolitan Goslar strategy to help it stand out.

Great projects are lovely by the way though. :)
___________________________________________________________________________
Negative

  • DLC'less naval recieves more of a nerf than a buff pushing one of the weakest flavor packs 'Golden Century' (which you also need to even play Gotland's pirate route as a actual pirate) unless naval barrage is a free feature in the new patch to celebrate close to 10 years of Eu4. Same for Exploration Ideas treasure fleets, it'd be more forthright to actually improve the DLC package to make it more attractive, than post-op edit more nessecary reasons to purchase it.

  • Tributization of Crimea doesn't impress me that much, it just seems like a wierd precedent and requires MoH for a Ottoman player to extract use from, especially regarding it might be a player's first nation with a weird hanger-on. I assume it'll just revert to a normal vassal without the expansion.

  • In MP the new scorch earth can be used theoretically for bullying other players prosperity provinces by flippantly burning the entire nation and disrupt the session, it should instead freeze gaining + exploiting development (the quickest fix to devestation made harder by more expensive provinces) if you want more pernamancy in my opinion

  • Nitpicky, but i assume 100% covert action relationhit actually makes it impossible to earn the Sus achievement in midgame if you can't take any negative opinions at all, keeping it as it was (including 60% support rebels but making all spynetwork actions 10%-15% cheaper as a bonus ideaset reward would be stronger on all stages of the game.
Thanks for your feedback. It won't be needed the Golden Century DLC to play as a pirate, as their mechanics will also be unlocked with the new upcoming DLC. About the Crimea fix, you're correct, although making it a Tributary instead of a March with the event addresses some of the problems we were observing about the Ottomans expanding quickly into the Russian region.
I think the modifiers written here are a bit weird, some seems to be at 100 Devotion and others per Point of Devotion. I think it's a bit confusing.
Also Monthly Fervor is missing as a modifier.
I'm going off the wiki right now so maybe I'm totally wrong about the current status of the modifiers, but assuming the wiki isn't horribly out of date, aren't some of these a nerf? 0.1 -> 0.001 piety is still increasing piety, but a lot more useless now since it pushes the bar up slower, and since piety in practice only exists from 0-100 this would be a nerf. 0.5 -> 0.1 patriarchal authority is just a direct downgrade, same with 1 -> 0.5 doom reduction, same with 0.1 -> 0.05 karma decay. I don't understand why religious needed to be made weaker, it's already not good.

Uhhh, I honestly think in 2022 we should be done with stuff like this, even if it's just the name of a flag in the script. I understand for gameplay reasons why this exception exists, but having a "primitive" designation specifically for Meso/South American religions would kinda suck even if it wasn't incredibly inaccurate – all three of these belief systems were incredibly sophisticated in practice.

If it's to keep colonial nations from being converted to Nahua by indigenous rebels or whatever, you could just make it so that colonial nations can't be converted by pagan rebels, ever. Or that colonial nations can't be converted away from the religion of their overlord by pagan rebels.
You're right, we don't like its name either by this point, but take into account this is a legacy description after a decade of development. We'll take into account this feedback for further reworks of the American indigenous religions, too. ;)


Thanks for the very informative diary! 1.34 looks to be a very impactful patch.

From what I read, I believe things are moving in the right direction regarding where monument focus is and relative power of rebalancing. I'm a big fan of much of the rest of patch too - just was hoping for some rare option for Norse inclusion! ;)



Some idea groups are often ignored completely in serious SP or MP games. I’m not a pro myself, but it is no secret Innovative, Espionage, Maritime, Aristocratic, Plutocratic, Defensive, and Naval were dismissed as not worth the idea slot in most cases. Already, this patch looks to be narrowing this gap with Maritime and Naval seeing some improvements. Administrative is also in an awkward place as the majority of people taking it only care about the -25% core-creation cost from Adaptability and 25% governing capacity modifier as the finisher; it's a one-trick pony simply to have more paint in your can for the map.


Some idea groups are considered strongly in light of their policies though, and while no group has all strong or weak policies, some are known outliers; you’ve mentioned the eco-quantity policy correctly as the largest offender in this regard. I agree the -30% development cost from only the economic and quantity groups is too concentrated.


One thing I’d like to see more of is the ideas in a group with multiple different components, similar to Maritime (except for Ship’s Penny at the moment). This allows benefits for many playstyles without as much one-dimensional stacking for abuse. There are certainly enough attributes in the game to avoid overemphasizing the same ones with ideas and policies!


I would like to offer the following suggestions, keeping the diary’s adjustments except at the end of Espionage:



Ideas:

Administrative:


  • Combine Organized Mercenary Payments with Benefits for Mercenaries.

  • Adaptability: Adjusted from -25% to -20%.

  • Replace what was Organized Mercenary Payments with a +25% government reform progress modifier.

Reasoning: -25% CCC stacked in certain situations to created extremely fast and low-expense expansion. Switching some of the identity to managing governing capacity allows this group to be more flexible with external conquest as well as internal administration … which is what the name implies anyway. Remember, reductions to cost when stacked additively are often stronger than increases, so while this may look like a big buff, it’s not as severe of an adjustment.



Innovative:

  • Dynamic Court: In addition, now has -5% development cost.

Reasoning: Small amounts of development cost in thematic underused groups can give players other opportunities to play taller while not being abused.


Espionage:

  • Bonus: Cancel the -50% covert action relation impact (leaving it only on State Propaganda)

Reasoning: Lowering this to 0% allows players to spy with impunity, while keeping some impact will make them consider their actions. Remember, the stronger the decrease to covert relation impact, the larger the indirect nerf to spy defense, which I don’t believe was the intent here. Consider replacing this bonus with Drinko’s idea regarding an action to lower aggressive expansion over time, perhaps for a higher network cost though.



Plutocratic:

  • Tradition of Payment: Now 15% Mercenary Manpower and 5% Mercenary Discipline., up from 10% and 2.5% respectively.

  • Free Subjects: In addition, now has +.1 Republican Tradition (or equivalent mechanic) per year.

  • Free Cities: In addition, now has -5% development cost.

Reasoning: The mercenary perks were too small to make the player reconsider force composition. Small amounts of development cost in thematic underused groups can give players other opportunities to play taller while not being abused. The government-specific groups should give some benefit to the government-specific mechanics to allow players to invest in different playstyles.



Defensive:

  • Battlefield Commissions: In addition, now has -.5% Army and Navy tradition decay.

  • Regimental System: In addition, now has +25% garrison size.

  • Supply Trains: In addition, now has +10% Movement Speed

Reasoning: These are all small benefits that will make the group more appealing compared to the offensive, quality, and quantity (even after adjustments) lines. The tradition decay reduction represents a society prepared for war while not at it as frequently. Garrisons are a place a defensive nation would have its soldiers serve, considering its many forts. Supply train troop logistics indicate planning to have battles on one’s own terms.



Aristocratic:

  • Noble Connections: No longer provides mercenary manpower. Instead:

  • +.5 Legitimacy (or equivalent mechanic) per year.

  • If Christian, take half the penalties from the claim throne diplomatic action.

  • If not Christian, may now claim thrones (and have personal unions) of your religious group.
Reasoning: Mercenaries are the identity for other idea groups; if anything, aristocracy should lead into the state’s army, which it does through their cavalry and manpower ideas. The government-specific groups should give some benefit to the government-specific mechanics to allow players to invest in different playstyles.





Policies:

Consider normalizing the values where possible via a point-cost comparison. The custom nation idea creator would be a good metric for this. For example, if the innovative-quality policy is going to be 15% combat ability for infantry, shouldn’t the aristocratic-espionage policy for cavalry be too – or the economic-offensive for artillery? Even indirect comparison can indicate some interesting value assigned to them. For example, from comparing innovative-defensive and innovative-quantity, one might believe 10% fort defense is worth -10% fort maintenance and +10% garrison size. Looking at defensive-espionage and defensive-influence, similar thoughts point equate -.1 corruption to -.03 war exhaustion. Transitively, there are many more comparisons that can be made.





Monuments:

Consider reviewing the global effects of monuments to see if there are edge cases that may be problematic when combined. Personally, the Salvador da Bahia seems very strong even on its own.


Thanks for your consideration. Feedback from the forum is appreciated!
Thanks for your very detailed feedback! Some of your suggestions are really interesting, you'll have some news about further fixes in a couple of weeks, as said. ;)
This is one of the few monuments whose effects I like. Artillery cost scales really well as a global modifier because it (mostly) needs to be actively used by recruiting artillery regiments.


I like the local modifiers. They should make stopping Swedish expansion into Denmark easier.

Could you make the naval tradition modifiers only apply to trade protection done in coastal nodes bordering the Baltic Sea and maybe North Sea?

Does upgrading the monument give you one-time increases to mercantilism?


Great local modifiers.

Could you make the privateer efficiency only apply to trade nodes bordering the Baltic Sea?


I like increases to possible advisors much better than the advisor discounts that some other monuments give. Since I've criticized those discounts in the past, I'd like to suggest replacing them with increases to possible advisors to represent either centers of government (like royal courts) or centers of culture and learning.

I also think restricting those advisor discounts to advisors whose culture are the same as the monument's province would be a good alternative.

Monuments shouldn't give expansionist powers a passive buff to monarch point generation; they should increase gameplay choices and historical flavor.


As multiple other people have pointed out, this monument creates perverse incentives for colonizers. This is why global modifiers are usually a bad idea in monuments.

The monument is clearly meant to boost a Brazilian colonial nation. Instead, it's most powerful when a colonizer controls it for the whole game and applies its bonuses across the world instead of just in Brazil.

Please, please replace global modifiers from monuments with region, colonial region, trade region, or super-region modifiers. The bonuses to trade power, settler increase, and goods produced here would be great if they only applied to owned provinces (perhaps with true faith and accepted culture) in the Brazil region. That would incentivize players to actually create a Brazilian colonial nation to apply the bonuses to dozens of Brazilian provinces instead of just four Brazilian provinces.


Could you restrict the institution spread bonus to the Congo region and/or provinces with an accepted culture? Neither should hurt Kongo much unless it's trying to conquer Africa, in which case it would make adopting new institutions too easy.


Even at Tier 1, this monument would mean every institution would automatically spread to this province in 33 years and 4 months. That's almost the equivalent of being able to develop a province for an institution, but without having to spend any monarch points.

Please change local institution growth to local or area institution spread. It would also make more sense for the monument: ideas need to be encountered before they can spread through an area.


I like the local and area modifiers a lot, especially for Sichuan.

Echoing what I've repeatedly asked above, could you replace the Tier 3 global modifier with a modifier restricted to the Xinan and South China regions? That's where the Yangtze River is and therefore where the flood control and irrigation would have yielded benefits. Even a Chinese super-region modifier would be better than a global modifier.

I'd also like to see the region modifiers restricted to provinces with an accepted culture. This should only hurt Chinese warlords and foreign conquerors that haven't seized the mandate, and China has historically been devastated mainly when it wasn't unified.


I like the new estate loyalty equilibrium bonuses.


There are a lot of treasure fleet income bonuses in the game now, especially for the Spanish, who are "supposed" to capture the bulk of the treasure fleet income. Spain gets +70% just from naval doctrine and the Council of the Indies government reform, plus another +25% from Exploration Ideas here and up to +20% from upgrading El Escorial.

Are there any balance concerns here? I can't think of a good way to adjust the balance other than either reducing base treasure fleet income per gold, or reducing all the bonuses listed above.


Do they also add a building slot? Universities do, and I think that's what you're implying here, but I'd like to know for sure.


There's no good reason why colonial nations in North America should be able to flip to Totemist but colonial nations in Central and South America should be immune to Nahuatl, Mayan and Incan rebels.

It would make more sense to only allow colonial nations to be broken by heretic religious rebels and to remove the primitive status of Nahuatl, Mayan and Incan altogether.


These are cool.


Does Crimea form alliances and get called into losing wars in this setup? If not, it's a great idea.



I'd change it to -50% fort maintenance in overseas and trade company provinces (but not stacking for overseas trade company provinces).
Thanks for your very detailed post! Let's see:
- We're keeping as global modifiers most of the ones you mentioned, with the exception of the Goods Production for Salvador da Bahia, as we're changing the scope to the Brazilian region; at least for 1.34.
- The Mercantilism gain of Kronborg is a one-time upgrade per tier, yes.
- Courthouses and Townhalls will be working as Universities, yes.
I noticed in a recent game that for wonders which require Confucianism (Gyeongbok Palace, Temple of Confucius), you can permanently lock yourself out of being able to use them as a Confucian nation when the province has a harmonized religion.

Since you're giving wonders another pass, any plans to change this?
We have some plans for 'harmonizing the script' (pun intended) in our backlog, but not for 1.34, as it will require some time that we do not have right now.
Are you going to change the art for the Walls of Benin? Because at the moment the art depicts the round city of Baghdad, which also has impressive walls, but it is not Benin.
Not for this update, but I'm going to add that to our backlog for the future.
Will there be any monuments for Riga? Something representing the old town of the city would be nice i.e. the 'Powder Tower' or one of the Lutheran cathedrals/churches (The Cathedral of Saint Mary or St Peter's Church).

These would also tie in nicely with the changes showcased in the earlier Dev Diary on Riga. ;)
We don't have plans for adding a monument in Riga at this moment.
What if Crimea refuse to become tributary in event? What CB Ottoman get? Make Tributary or Subjugation?
The usual CB, the Tributary feature is just linked to the 'free vassalization' option.
Are there any plans to apply the new "don't lose professionalism when recruiting" thing to the Hungarian Black Army?
Already done for 1.34.
One of the Trakai Castle bonus is the sole underwhelming thing in this DD.

Local modifiers: +10%/15%/25% Local manpower is a little bit weak considering we talk about a single province. You could easily go for +100%/150%/200% without any fear concerning balance.
You're correct, the manpower in this monument is a bit underwhelming, we're going to adjust up a bit the numbers.
Maybe a little late in this thread, so hopefully this still get read but with the change to State houses: any chance for us to see where a state house has been built?

If a state has 4 provinces, and they all have a manufactury (very common in mid-lategame) then it's currently not possible to see if a state has a statehouse. Would love if a state like that gets a different color on the minimap.
Not for 1.34, but we'll take this into account for a future patch.
So, is this an increase or a decrease? Because if local dev cost is getting increased by a negative...
Bad wording. The modifier for Expanding Infrastructure will be -25% Development Cost instead of -5%, so now the action is reducing Dev Cost more than before when being used.
Another issue IMO is a cheesy mechanic of Slacken Recruiting Standards. "Hire 5 generals and get two years of manpower for free!" makes no sense. It encourages players to inflate their maximum manpower as much as possible so they can get even more men from thin air in the time of need.
We're also changing the gain of manpower from this source: Slackening for Manpower now only gives 1 year worth of manpower instead of 2 years. It was an overlook to not add it to the Miscellaneous Changes, I'm just doing it.
Speaking of misplaced idea group events, the "Our cause is just" event granting -20% AE is still filed under Influence, even though the AE reduction idea was moved from there to Espionage some time ago. I assume this is an oversight.

It seems that no one has gone through the list of idea group pulse events to update them and account for all of the changes that have been made in idea groups for some time, such as moving ideas from one group to another. Usually any related pulse event or policy gets left behind. I think this inspection should be done before the new DLC releases. The same review should also be done for policies.
Thanks for the report, we're probably going to take a look at this for the next update - after 1.34, I mean. ;)


Once again, thank you very much for all the comments and feedback received, and let me say sorry for some omissions and errors in the DD - we literally went through hundreds of lines in the changelog to compile the most meaningful changes upcoming in the 1.34 update, and some got lost while porting, which is up to me, and not the wonderful team here at Tinto. See you!
 
  • 20Like
  • 9
  • 5Love
Reactions:
We're also changing the gain of manpower from this source: Slackening for Manpower now only gives 1 year worth of manpower instead of 2 years. It was an overlook to not add it to the Miscellaneous Changes, I'm just doing it.
I was thinking about entirely different way to change this. Instead of instant manpower gain, Slacken button could for example increase manpower recovery speed for the next 5 years. In this case effect still depends on total manpower, but it's not so pronounced, and cannot be used as a panic button.

For extreme cases when you suddenly find yourself with 0 manpower, solution should be hiring mercenaries. Unfortunately, there are a few issues with mercenaries, for example bugs with movement of attached armies, unreasonably high professionalism cost that doesn't even depend on company size. It would be great if developers team could put some efforts into making mercs a viable alternative to inflating manpower with dev (at least when relevant idea groups are taken).
 
Last edited:
  • 9Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
This change makes Quantity much less helpful for small countries which badly lack manpower and force limits. I think along with these nerf Quantity should provide flat bonuses for manpower and land force limit, specifically to help minors. See also this discussion.
This post of mine have collected 3 dislikes. When I wrote it I thought it's something really obvious, like 2+2=4. Could anyone bother to explain, what do you disagree with?
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I know this is a long way down the thread now but can you please put descriptions of monuments in game? (someone please let me know if I am just missing something) I would love to get a little bit of information about why these monuments are important not just what they give me from a gameplay perspective.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Ayyyy nice! Anyone know when this will be released? I don't feel comfortable starting any intense runs knowing they won't be ironman compatible in a while.
All we know is that their summer break is in August, and there sounds to still be stuff to be done after that, so we won't be seeing it for another number of weeks.
 
This post of mine have collected 3 dislikes. When I wrote it I thought it's something really obvious, like 2+2=4. Could anyone bother to explain, what do you disagree with?
Because minors already, by the mid-game, are fielding armies way way larger than they should be. A single city with a few square kilometres of territory running around with an army of 20k, doesn't make sense. And, just in general, flat number boosts are way harder to balance than % based boosts, since they can be way too strong in some scenarios and way too weak in others.

It'd be like having Economic granting +10 ducats per month, regardless of context. In some scenarios thats crazy powerful, in others its totally meaningless.
 
Because minors already, by the mid-game, are fielding armies way way larger than they should be. A single city with a few square kilometres of territory running around with an army of 20k, doesn't make sense.
If they took Quantity ideas, they will have lower limit now, and need compensation. If they didn't, they are unaffected.


And, just in general, flat number boosts are way harder to balance than % based boosts, since they can be way too strong in some scenarios and way too weak in others.
What's the problem with adding, say, +3 land force limit and +3000 manpower? Nobody except minors will notice this.
 
What's the problem with adding, say, +3 land force limit and +3000 manpower? Nobody except minors will notice this.
That's pretty much what you get from the idea set. Base manpower is 10k, base force limit is 6 - though normally, an OPM will have more than 10 dev, so it's more likely to be 7. Quantity will thus give you +2/3 FL depending on how it computes for 7, and 3.3k manpower with the new modifier values. Are you suggesting that minors should receive an additional boost on top of that? Remember that flat values would be modified by your idea set, so you're not "only" giving them 3k. You're giving them 10k+3k = 13k*1.33 = 17,290 - 10k = 7,290 manpower. That's the base manpower plus the flat 3k, times 33%. This more than doubles what the idea set would normally give you, and equals roughly 16 mil dev extra, which is huge if we're talking about OPMs or very small nations.

Just for context: Giving a flat modifier in addition to the percentage modifier would make a hypothetical 3-dev OPM have more MP/FL than Brandenburg at game start.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Love most of the changes. Hate the admin efficiency penalty for being over governing cap though. There's already a core creation cost increase, so now creating cores will be doubly penalised? The new penalty seems to grow too quickly too!

I'm also confused by some of the modifiers. eg. Dujiangyan has -10% Development efficiency? SO, minus dev efficiency? As in it makes development cost more? It should it be +10%? Expanding infrastructure too, increases local development by -25%? So, you mean decreases it by 25%?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
We're also changing the gain of manpower from this source: Slackening for Manpower now only gives 1 year worth of manpower instead of 2 years. It was an overlook to not add it to the Miscellaneous Changes, I'm just doing it.
I feel that a much more sensible way to implement slackening would be to have it give a +10% manpower bonus for a year rather than a suddenly dumping a pile of men into your reserves.

If you're going to maintain it the way it currently works, you should at least relabel it "forced conscription" or something.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I feel that a much more sensible way to implement slackening would be to have it give a +10% manpower bonus for a year rather than a suddenly dumping a pile of men into your reserves.

If you're going to maintain it the way it currently works, you should at least relabel it "forced conscription" or something.
I've always rationalised it in the way that EU4 professionalism works on Reaganomics, and military readiness "trickles down" to the general population. So basically, the higher your professionalism, the larger percentage of your population is combat-ready.
 
I've always rationalised it in the way that EU4 professionalism works on Reaganomics, and military readiness "trickles down" to the general population. So basically, the higher your professionalism, the larger percentage of your population is combat-ready.
Getting people into military service is not only a matter of them being combat-ready. You also need: 1) people and infrastructure to conscript them; 2) ability to extract more people from economy (which is mostly agrarian, and you don't want to cause famine); 3) supplies to keep larger standing army.

So I think it would be better if Slacken increased manpower recovery speed (as I've already suggested above), not manpower itself. Lower standard means you can find people quicker, and they require less training to get ready.
 
I've always rationalised it in the way that EU4 professionalism works on Reaganomics, and military readiness "trickles down" to the general population. So basically, the higher your professionalism, the larger percentage of your population is combat-ready.
I get by just fine without it with pacing and very occasionally having to admit defeat in my wars (shocking i know), but I think as a panic button it will be leant on too much next patch without any sort of substantial changes since you do pay mana essentially to win in a more mana heavy enviroment than before. IMHO nerfing it would directly damage the sales probably of the DLC since you can slacken anywhere in the world or whatever setting in a mostly region focused DLC, not least, like doing something to retroactively improve it like giving advisor promotions branching paths (commandants to tacticians with extra roll chances etc.) or polishing up trade policies to be a little bit nicer or exclusive (exaggerating trade value of a certain monopolized good etc)

Not to mention you can already damage troop recruitment in the lategame (tech 21) with spy-networking to choke when this meatgrinder proposition of 5 years of MP Anullen suggested is availible, so there is a limiting factor to lots of AI's culminatively damaging your relations, trade and recruitment at once being able to execute it.
 
IMHO nerfing it would directly damage the sales probably of the DLC since you can slacken anywhere in the world or whatever setting in a mostly region focused DLC,
Are you seriously advocating pay to win as DLC sales strategy?

BTW, Cradle of Civiliazation contains other very important and powerful mechanincs which are not region focused, namely trading policies and promotion of advisors. And, of course, "exploit development" which is crucial for some strategies
 
  • 1
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Are you seriously advocating pay to win as DLC sales strategy?

BTW, Cradle of Civiliazation contains other very important and powerful mechanincs which are not region focused, namely trading policies and promotion of advisors. And, of course, "exploit development" which is crucial for some strategies
Acknowledging that DLC is systematically ranked in the order of general utility building EU4 from the base up id prefer over pay to win, you pay to recover which nets you a narrow shot at a win for 200 - 250* mana points at base with the bounceback. Fair enough, i forgot about exploit development being from this DLC specifically, but im sure its not lost on you how the methodology for the DLC of (x amount of years of resource on buttonpress, in bulk) in exploit development is in the same postion as what the discussion was recently on about.

Many people also complain about advisors in general, never getting a apt great person without a lot of cycling through, but im suprised you didn't mention professionalism as a feature as its kind of bled into nessecity. Its a generally useful DLC with some fast & easy design choices on buttons, which i dont feel like a worse EU4 player for not owning it simply because if i had i could win more, but more of a purist to gradual buildup and economic development/I guess to say industrialization.

To put it in perspective if you have a paradox dlc subscription (which is a good idea if you can afford it for getting over the 'choices' of DLC option listings) If you have a great defecit, the natural solution is to play or reform a horde, concentrate, raze, then exploit anything left, and put at least 3/4 dev of your own over the easy development to set devastation down lower, make five generals out of the excess mana, get your men back then rinse and repeat.
 
Last edited:
Acknowledging that DLC is systematically ranked in the order of general utility building EU4 from the base up id prefer over pay to win, you pay to recover which nets you a narrow shot at a win for 200 - 250* mana points at base with the bounceback.
Don't know about you, but for me an idea of paying money to buy in-game resources in single player game is outlandish. I buy DLCs if (and only if) I like mechanics or other content they offer.