Not from the mod, non, but unlimited slots isn't alien to the game. EU 4 used to have unlimited slots before Common and Sense, as did EU 3. Granted, the buildings system was different and there was no such thing as development.
- 1
Do we really need building limit depending on devolpment?
- Thread starter makaramus
- 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.
Not from the mod, non, but unlimited slots isn't alien to the game. EU 4 used to have unlimited slots before Common and Sense, as did EU 3. Granted, the buildings system was different and there was no such thing as development.
Also to people saying "building limits create strategic options"
I can say same thing for "unlimited buildings" too , even more
by removving building limits instead of building best buildings you need to decide if you want another church at somwere else or keep building at same area and stack bonuses there + decide if its worth to spend more money at there instead of building some better building like another manufactory at somewere else
because lets be honest, for wide everyone knows building order
Courthouse, manufactory an workplace
if production value is a lot like gems or paper then court house may take last place
its no strategy here. Atleast if there was no limit you would be asking "do I want to build this harbor here or I need more money?"
I can say same thing for "unlimited buildings" too , even more
by removving building limits instead of building best buildings you need to decide if you want another church at somwere else or keep building at same area and stack bonuses there + decide if its worth to spend more money at there instead of building some better building like another manufactory at somewere else
because lets be honest, for wide everyone knows building order
Courthouse, manufactory an workplace
if production value is a lot like gems or paper then court house may take last place
its no strategy here. Atleast if there was no limit you would be asking "do I want to build this harbor here or I need more money?"
- 2
- 1
At first I wasn’t sure on the idea, but the more I think about it, and the more you fine people discuss on this forum, the more I’m coming around to the idea.
good to hear
I also wanted to say someting more:let us build or convert while colonists devolping land like I dont know, sounds much better than suffering stupid problems by AI subjects
- 4
My concern with this proposal is simple: the low development, effectively worthless, provinces now become cheap valuable sources for any nation able to control the trade and buy buildings in them. Isn’t Russia powerful enough already?
As it stands, a 3 dev province in a territory costs 0.75 governing capacity. With a manufactory or feeds 6 development worth of trade value into the trade network. Do you really want to reduce the governing capacity cost of this province to 0.03? That is a massive boost!
it also feels a little like plastering over limitations of the UI. If it wasn’t such a pain stripping out the buildings the AI builds, and organising your own building plans, this would be far less of an issue.
As it stands, a 3 dev province in a territory costs 0.75 governing capacity. With a manufactory or feeds 6 development worth of trade value into the trade network. Do you really want to reduce the governing capacity cost of this province to 0.03? That is a massive boost!
it also feels a little like plastering over limitations of the UI. If it wasn’t such a pain stripping out the buildings the AI builds, and organising your own building plans, this would be far less of an issue.
- 4
- 2
I didnt get your point? can you explain me?
How did I reduce capacity cost to 0.03?
The three dev province currently has a single building slot. You can either build a manufactory to make it economically useful, or you can build a courthouse which renders it virtually free in governing capacity terms if it is a territory.
if you remove the building slot limit, you can now build both: this is a massive boost to the value of the most worthless provinces in the game, by allowing a significant feed into a trade m a province that is almost free in terms of governing capacity. It gets even worse if you add town halls to allow adding the province to a trade company and extracting production income from it as well with workshops.
- 6
it is massive boost to that land I agree but I disagree with the fact its powerful
you are gonna build courthouse to your rich lands first anyway and despite being very good worhplace is not must have to make profit from manufactories
I am not saying "you are wrong" I just disagree with the fact its that strong
and if it is , then again, there are ways to fix it
- 3
But it is already fixed: not allowing building massive resource extraction operations in the most barren and inhospitable territories on the planet without significant investment and effort, as represented by the current requirement to develop The provinces to dev 10 to get a second building slot.
Manufactories in low dev provinces where you control the trade network has always been a strong option, hence the term manufactory spam. 1.30 partially nerfed this with the introduction of governing capacity and the addition of courthouses as a “must build” option. This change proposes reversing that, while effectively destroying any element of governing capacity as a limitation on expansionist empires as courthouses in territories make the land effectively free in governing capacity terms. Removing any element of strategic decisions about “do I build a courthouse or...?” is hardly going to be a massive improvement.
In real life, it required the railroad to even begin to properly extract the wealth of siberia, and in practice serious extraction of resources from artic regions doesn’t start until the industrial period and into the twentieth century.
As I said, the biggest arguments for this for me are it is a plaster over defects in the game itself, and I would prefer to see those flaws fixed Instead.
- 7
- 1
we can make manufactories produce more if land is devolped.This will not check production but overall devolpment of land since manufactories are not supposed to be percentage based buildings.
this not only solves problem you presented but also buffs tall
edit:Not workhouses,,,, manufactories
How about an alternative proposal: scrap courthouses and simply give everyone a GC reduction modifier or 25% at admin 8 instead? In practice, it would achieve almost the same effect in practice because it would remove the one strategic decision most people ever make with buildings which is related to the courthouse.
No? Bad idea? Then why are you advocating for the exact same effect by a different method. The only times I find myself caring about the building slot limits are when I need to remove stuff the AI has built to fit a courthouse in, or when I find myself having to choose between a courthouse or a manufactory. I suspect, in practice, this is going to be the same for most players. The first is a straight up flaw in the game/UI. The second was a large part of the point in the governing capacity modifier being attached to the otherwise utterly unloved courthouse.
Without slot limits you build manufactories and courthouses everywhere. The exact order is a minor decision, and for the most part isn‘t even a decision. Slots do introduce strategic decisions, unless you are so resource constrained you aren’t building much anyway.
No? Bad idea? Then why are you advocating for the exact same effect by a different method. The only times I find myself caring about the building slot limits are when I need to remove stuff the AI has built to fit a courthouse in, or when I find myself having to choose between a courthouse or a manufactory. I suspect, in practice, this is going to be the same for most players. The first is a straight up flaw in the game/UI. The second was a large part of the point in the governing capacity modifier being attached to the otherwise utterly unloved courthouse.
Without slot limits you build manufactories and courthouses everywhere. The exact order is a minor decision, and for the most part isn‘t even a decision. Slots do introduce strategic decisions, unless you are so resource constrained you aren’t building much anyway.
- 5
- 1
You know, the base building limit is 2. The only terrain type that decreases it is artic (-1). So, it is already the case that all 3 dev provinces get manufactories and courthouses and when it comes to artic provinces only manufactories. 3 dev artic provinces, if stated, consume 3 GC and if left unstated 0.75. Their GC impact is miniscule, so much so that the ROI of building courthouses there is close to non-existent and they aren't even worth to be stated.
Keep in mind that regardless of building slots or not there is a clear building priority. Such a priority has to do mostly with the development of the land, meaning that 3 dev land (or anything below 10 dev really) is usually the last place you will build stuff on.
- 3
- 1
its bad idea because I dont make this suggestion based on court houses. It just also solves their micro problem. Also your suggestion also removes money cost. If you said "coring lands will cost 100 ducat each" then that would be fine for me.
I make this suggestion because it annoys me that limit exists only because of manufactories are base value
if they were not and just boosted production based on devolpment(of any kind) building limits would be a feature that causing nothing else then a bloating
I get your point and I agree with you but I think having a rule JUST BECAUSE of an exception is not healty game design choice
- 3
There is certainly a lesser strategic decision to make if there was unlimited building slots. And development still has a value if lesser since it does not unlock building slots.
- 3
- 1
- 1
I disagree
you will never build this buildings at 3 devolpment land:
Church,workhouse(no manufactory),barracks,docks,marketplace.
buildings that you may build but wont because no one builds them:
Shipyard,regimental camp,coastal defenses
Wait... whats that? did I count EVERY SINGLE BUILDING but courthouse and manufactories just ago? WOOOOW.... such strategic options!
(and forts but its not someting you want everywere so... its most likely no too)
Last edited:
- 1
- 1
This is not a bad idea honestly.
I actually don't like the current iteration of EU4, once you get to courthouses and state house, the game turns into micromanagement hell where you have to babysit every single province to make sure it has the optimal buildings. This has become a major issue that arises from the otherwise decent idea to give the player more so-called 'strategic choice'.
Except when your empire literally consists of a thousand++ provinces, it's a goddamn chore.
I spend FAR MORE than half my time playing EU4 these days dutifully clicking on every single province of my empire one at a time and going through my internal list:
No state house in state? Build one in either gem/glass/paper or the 'worst' province in the state.
Fish/grain/livestock/wine? Courthouse + soldier's households + barracks (+regimental camp if possible).
Anything else? Courthouse + manufactory + workshop (+regimental camp if possible)
Once that is done, start adding things like temples, shipyards, extra barracks, extra workshops, maybe a marketplace if it's a high value trade node.
And since 1. tech, development and ability changes throughout the game and 2. my memory isn't infallible, I find myself going through every single province every few years, of my entire empire, deleting buildings and building new ones and fixing mistakes in buildings or deleting crap the AI built.
Simply from the viewpoint of removing a MASSIVE chore from the game, removing building limits is an excellent idea.
- 2
Over the year the number of provinces increased significantly and each time new provinces are added the micromanagement load increases as well. Having new buildings for us to build also increase the micromanagement that is expected of the player.
That is to say, building buildings is fine when you have but a few provinces. However, once you have dozens and hundreds of provinces that entire part of the game becomes nothing but a chore.
I disagree even with this part of the tall v wide consideration. Some buildings are obviously more useful than others, and you can't build more than one of each type per province. Same for trade company investments, which ignore slots.
GC makes building management a severe micromanagement hassle. Though I'd advocate fixing the EU 4 UI generally, including regarding buildings. In terms of # inputs required to do basic things players often do the EU 4 UI ranges from bad to awful.
- 2
- 1
do you know... what I understand from here is this is a popular idea majority will support but there is a minority that is large enough that will create havoc
Which is fair
Which is fair
@makaramus Arguing that the silent majority agrees with you and is being ignored by a vocal minority requires very significant evidence to support, evidence which is completely lacking from this thread.
- 5
- 1