The total possible development should be limited too. And building slots should appear faster than each 10 development imo.
- 1
+5 cost per development needs to go.
- Thread starter hashinshin
- 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.
In alt universe of EU4 chopping wood has never been invented, this is why the province remains as woodlands no matter how you develop it. which means development suffers from lack of space as everything has to be built around the trees
yes to both. max development should depend on tech. and building slots should be every 5 development
- 2
- 2
Every 5? Might as well not have the restriction in there at all. Very few provinces need more than 2-3 buildings.
- 2
there are 11 different building types if you count upgrades as one single building. And generally speaking you don't improve any provinces at all. even if you did improve them, 10 improvements is extremely costly. even if the +5 per click is removed we are looking at 50 mana per click +terrain penalty +1% per dev. that is over 500 mana for one extra slot. making it 250 mana per extra slot is not going to make it less of an important decision.
- 1
You're talking only about the worst case scenario. Fact is that you have lots of provinces that are just 1-3 dev levels away from getting another building slot. Paying 50-100 mp to have another slot (plus the dev bonuses), isn't expensive.
- 1
No I am not. I was literally giving numbers that did not include the 1% per dev cost and the penalty for land type.
500 is actually always more due to the 1% per dev, and can easily become a LOT more if you include terrain type penalties
So when you said "might as well not have it at all" what you actually meant was "you could get the first extra slot free"?
Because let me remind you, 11 different buildings. Yes the first one might randomly end up being only a 50-100 mana points. But then every additional slot costs the full price of 500 and 250 (+ the 1% per dev)
Exactly! I'm talking about the first slot you can unlock. All the others obviously fall in the case you mentioned.
- 1
The fact that you said "why even have the limitation at all" suggested you were talking about all the slots rather than only the first slot.
Because it might shock you, unlocking slot number 2 out of 11 does not nullify the need to make hard choices
In a grand strategy game, everything is about choices (some more easier than others). That's why i don't like the idea of instituting a cap for building slots, which is a hard cap for those who don't have CS.
- 5
... this literally has nothing to do with the ongoing discussion and we don't need yet another thread being derailed with "DLC vs base game".
The development-based cap on building slots replaces the boring question "does this building pay off fast enough?" with the (IMO) slightly more interesting question "does this building pay off fast enough, and is it worth the opportunity cost of tying up a slot?".
- 2
I never found that decision to be boring. I don't find the new limitation to be in any way shape or form interesting. And you could make the same opportunity cost decision if it gave you more slots than 1/11
Also, the choice is generally a no brainer.
This change destroyed my game. I had a save in 1700. After the beta,
-capital development from 20 to 200 in dozens of years.
-every single province over 60 development. Every building except for fortress and government building built in every province.
-40 provinces mid-size nation(17th largest), yet more than double income, double manpower than the largest nation Ottoman that is 3 times bigger than my nation.
-400 regiments and 250 ships. 50 large ships.
-150k ducats at 1820 end.
The game's balance is completely broken. My Capital's income went 10 folds in 100 years and my overall income tripled in the same game. Balance wise that's absolutely ridiculous. Being one of 4% who downvoted OP I'm quite angry the change came out preciously as I expected.
I'm not even going to bother making a thread about it against 96% majority. I will just have to wait for people to come to their senses or M&T to fix the problem. Good luck playing with null building system(you can build everything in every province lol) and overflooding income and manpower.
The dev cost of my capital with 200 development:
GG.
-capital development from 20 to 200 in dozens of years.
-every single province over 60 development. Every building except for fortress and government building built in every province.
-40 provinces mid-size nation(17th largest), yet more than double income, double manpower than the largest nation Ottoman that is 3 times bigger than my nation.
-400 regiments and 250 ships. 50 large ships.
-150k ducats at 1820 end.
The game's balance is completely broken. My Capital's income went 10 folds in 100 years and my overall income tripled in the same game. Balance wise that's absolutely ridiculous. Being one of 4% who downvoted OP I'm quite angry the change came out preciously as I expected.
I'm not even going to bother making a thread about it against 96% majority. I will just have to wait for people to come to their senses or M&T to fix the problem. Good luck playing with null building system(you can build everything in every province lol) and overflooding income and manpower.
The dev cost of my capital with 200 development:
cost: 83
Developmetn efficiency -60%
land reform -20%
full economy focus -20%
reichsreform -5%
organized through bishops -5%
capital city -10%
university -20%
development +400%
coastal center of trade -5%
Mind you, I had land reform custom idea with 20% discount but 200 development is ridiculous in the first place. I could build every building with 80 development and I just wanted to see how far I could go.
Developmetn efficiency -60%
land reform -20%
full economy focus -20%
reichsreform -5%
organized through bishops -5%
capital city -10%
university -20%
development +400%
coastal center of trade -5%
Mind you, I had land reform custom idea with 20% discount but 200 development is ridiculous in the first place. I could build every building with 80 development and I just wanted to see how far I could go.
GG.
Last edited:
- 1
How did you manage to improve so much your provinces? Can you explain how much MP you had to spend for each level on average?
Anyone played a bit, how is development going now? I checked a bit in Venice game at start and it looked expensive overall (75+ points per click).
I will post the dev cost of my capital at 200 development:
cost: 83
Developmetn efficiency -60%
land reform -20%
full economy focus -20%
reichsreform -5%
organized through bishops -5%
capital city -10%
university -20%
development +400%
coastal center of trade -5%
Mind you, I had land reform custom idea with 20% discount but 200 development is ridiculous in the first place. I could build every building with 80 development and I just wanted to see how far I could go.
Last edited:
- 1
And, to contrast, how powerful would he have been had he spend all the ADM and DIP MP on exapnsion instead?
If he played protestant and HRE minor, he need only 30 MP(development efficiency, economic idea, university, protestant, HRE reform) for improving 1 development of 100dev province at late game. With national idea(-10% improvement cost), need only 24 MP.
I have said that you guys want fantasy game, not a simulation game. So the game becomes fantasy game at 1.13 with removal of +5 cost per improvement, are you satisfied?
- 3
- 1
With this change you should see much more developed provinces then before. Another change is that devlopment efficiency is gotten earlier and it can reach 60% + the bug should be fixed.
I just warned that 30-30-30 or 20-20-20 provinces would become rather common but a 200 monster was a bit out of my sight. What is need is that the money cost of everything (expect maybe buildings) increase over time like advisors currently does.
Development cost % could be: 1% for first development + 2% for second development + n% for the nth development. So if you have developed a province 5 times the % cost would be:
(1+2+3+4+5)% = 15% instead of the current (2+2+2+2+2)% = 10%.
This should stop super developed provinces but not in the same way as +5 cost increase did.
I just warned that 30-30-30 or 20-20-20 provinces would become rather common but a 200 monster was a bit out of my sight. What is need is that the money cost of everything (expect maybe buildings) increase over time like advisors currently does.
Development cost % could be: 1% for first development + 2% for second development + n% for the nth development. So if you have developed a province 5 times the % cost would be:
(1+2+3+4+5)% = 15% instead of the current (2+2+2+2+2)% = 10%.
This should stop super developed provinces but not in the same way as +5 cost increase did.
- 3
- 2