About colonization in 1.12 without CS.

[WeissRaben]

So, Wiz has confirmed that development has been mostly lowered in the Americas, in 1.12. This probably is to make some space for successive expansion of manpower/tax/production - and it makes a lot of sense. Brazil, in 1550, had 15'000 inhabitants; the massive armies of its ingame counterpart being gone would be a boon.

The problem being, of course, that increasing development is paywalled. How is this going to affect colonization for those who do not buy Common Sense? Was this considered? Was this, even (but I hope not), planned?

 

[panther29]

This has been asked a couple of times in the dev diary, but wiz hasn't commented

 

[WeissRaben]

This has been asked a couple of times in the dev diary, but wiz hasn't commented

Yep. It's exactly why I posted this thread - the question can't remain visible in an ongoing thread without becoming nagging. A dedicated thread is more visible.

 

[Wizzington]

Lowering development for uncolonized world was something we've been planning to do for a while and would have been done even if it weren't for Common Sense. Same with the other map changes. It's true that it will make new world colonization a bit less lucrative if you don't have the expansion, but it shouldn't be a massive difference.

 

[Haldan]

Lowering development for uncolonized world was something we've been planning to do for a while and would have been done even if it weren't for Common Sense. Same with the other map changes. It's true that it will make new world colonization a bit less lucrative if you don't have the expansion, but it shouldn't be a massive difference.

What's the development like in Mesoamerica and South America?

 

[Wizzington]

What's the development like in Mesoamerica and South America?

Largely unchanged in the areas owned by countries at start.

 

[Incompetent]

So, Wiz has confirmed that development has been mostly lowered in the Americas, in 1.12. This probably is to make some space for successive expansion of manpower/tax/production - and it makes a lot of sense. Brazil, in 1550, had 15'000 inhabitants; the massive armies of its ingame counterpart being gone would be a boon.

The problem being, of course, that increasing development is paywalled. How is this going to affect colonization for those who do not buy Common Sense? Was this considered? Was this, even (but I hope not), planned?

Unless you are actually playing as an American country, the difference will depend a lot on how aggressively the AI uses development. I doubt a CN the size of Brazil would spam development hard enough to make much of a difference to its overall power level.

Also, development is going to be spread all over the map (or at least across the places ruled by high-tech countries). Lots of development will make a big difference to the 'absolute' strength of various countries (income, manpower etc), but the effect on *relative* power between the majors could be quite modest.

I'd imagine the main advantage of Common Sense development for colonizers is if you are say Portugal or Netherlands and sticking to historical borders in Europe, it will make it easier to build up enough manpower on your cramped homeland to guard your massive overseas empire. There, development can make a difference because it spends a MP type that you have in abundance to boost something you are desperately short on. Development in the colonies themselves would be a comparatively minor concern.

 

[BFTeixeira]

Lowering development for uncolonized world was something we've been planning to do for a while and would have been done even if it weren't for Common Sense. Same with the other map changes. It's true that it will make new world colonization a bit less lucrative if you don't have the expansion, but it shouldn't be a massive difference.

Isn't that going to have a massive effect if you want to release and play a CN? I mean, it's been nerfed, and without the DLC you can't do a thing about it.

 

[Incompetent]

Isn't that going to have a massive effect if you want to release and play a CN? I mean, it's been nerfed, and without the DLC you can't do a thing about it.

Sure you can: play a mod where development values in the Americas are higher.

 

[BFTeixeira]

Sure you can: play a mod where development values in the Americas are higher.

I always play ironman. Only played once with VeF out of curiosity.

 

[mudcrabmerchant]

Events to increase basetax/development based on immigration could be enough to balance things out. Give them all a long MTTH, and decrease it for colonial regions that are closer in climate and geographic position to Europe (i.e. 13 Colonies and La Plata, perhaps California for Asian colonizers) and you'll end up with broadly historical levels of development throughout the Americas.

 

[Thrac]

Largely unchanged in the areas owned by countries at start.

Will the Native americans keep ther unique buildings?

 

[Mattymooz]

I always play ironman. Only played once with VeF out of curiosity.

Well then, don't complain? The whole point of the game is that devs can develop it how they want it. If you don't like a change you can either roll back to a later patch or mod it, but I doubt they are going to change it for someone who for whatever reason refuses to play without the game saving every month...........

 

[kitemasaki]

Lowering development for uncolonized world was something we've been planning to do for a while and would have been done even if it weren't for Common Sense. Same with the other map changes. It's true that it will make new world colonization a bit less lucrative if you don't have the expansion, but it shouldn't be a massive difference.

I think this was a good choice. Gives more of a reward for going to the East for rich goods and developed land rather than the New World. All for it and it makes more "common sense" huehue.

 

[Niebulheim]

Will the Native americans keep ther unique buildings?

Yes, Wiz has confirmed that.

 

[YouMust99]

Will the Native americans keep ther unique buildings?

On his stream ddrjake showed that they still have their buildings, but the interface has been given a new look.

 

[Neoton]

I always play ironman. Only played once with VeF out of curiosity.

You are missing a lot.

 

[Gaussia]

I belive most colonizable provinces will be off thoose types (climate and terrain usually) that will be very bad for development anyway.

 

[BFTeixeira]

You are missing a lot.

Maybe I am, and I sincerely admire the work of the modding comunity. My experience with VeF was great. But i really enjoy playing ironman mode.
What bugs me in this patch, it's that they replaced a free-for-all core feature, with another that is complete only for those who pay the DLC. That's nerfing the game experience for those without the DLC.

 

[BFTeixeira]

I belive most colonizable provinces will be off thoose types (climate and terrain usually) that will be very bad for development anyway.

Yeah, why should you develop your tropical hills provinces in south america, just because they've got gold mines...