Doesn't Development end... very unrealistic?
- Thread starter Krajzen
- 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.
It's been a while since I played 1.12, but didn't development seem to stay pretty sane in it?
There was uproar about how weak colonial province development was, but maybe there's another solution to that, like increasing the starting development of new world provinces.
There was uproar about how weak colonial province development was, but maybe there's another solution to that, like increasing the starting development of new world provinces.
It can be countered very easily by adding "total development" modifier that counts average development of your realm. So if your 4 province nation has very high average level of development it should be very expencive to develope it further. Kind of "city needs a countryside" mentality.
Paradox announced you can now play tall with small countries. You suggestion would completly cancel that option.
Jesus Christ... 133 agrees 5 disagrees... I expected like 20 agrees 15 disagrees...
I think I talked in another thread about time delays for development. You spend your mana and like with culture conversion it then takes a set amount of time to upgrade the province, if it scaled by about a half year per development then it would be 10 years for a 20 dev province, which would be punitively high.
I also mentioned the idea of bringing back bureaucrats, working them like missionaries, except draining 1 mana per month and building up development. So it would take 50 months for your first province upgrade. I mean, it does reduce the ability to mana burn, but that's what's causing these problems/this weirdness.
I also mentioned the idea of bringing back bureaucrats, working them like missionaries, except draining 1 mana per month and building up development. So it would take 50 months for your first province upgrade. I mean, it does reduce the ability to mana burn, but that's what's causing these problems/this weirdness.
Probably already mentioned somewhere, but here are my quick thoughts.
1. Give Empire level government a big development bonus to their capital. Hopefully this will make the great political centres of the World a bit bigger.
2. Introduce a new modifier "Rebuilding" that sharply increases development cost in a province. This modifier will be activated for 10-20 years after a province was occupied or pillaged.
3. Introduce a new modifier "Clearling new lands" that doubles the development cost in a province and is applied for 1-2 years after a development.
4. Attach a small gold cost to development, something like 10-20 % of the power cost. This will hopefully make it a bit harder for small and poor OPMs to develop really tall.
1. Give Empire level government a big development bonus to their capital. Hopefully this will make the great political centres of the World a bit bigger.
2. Introduce a new modifier "Rebuilding" that sharply increases development cost in a province. This modifier will be activated for 10-20 years after a province was occupied or pillaged.
3. Introduce a new modifier "Clearling new lands" that doubles the development cost in a province and is applied for 1-2 years after a development.
4. Attach a small gold cost to development, something like 10-20 % of the power cost. This will hopefully make it a bit harder for small and poor OPMs to develop really tall.
- 1
Because the only people that think development is fine as is are dev sycophants, it's clearly broken and anyone with half a brain can see this
what's honestly more surprising is how much Wiz et al. refuse to admit they released a half baked mechanic and say they don't see the problems players are reporting.
It's like they didn't even playtest the DLC for more than 50 years or something. I thought PDX said they were done not playing their games before releasing them? (3:30 minutes in the video below)
"Does nobody at Paradox play their games before they come out?"
Last edited:
- 4
- 3
- 1
Well at least we know they had one month of vacations, which is more than enough to take a good rest and then do some deep analysis of what they want to do with the game.
Even then development is in better shape now then in the first 1.12, or that version where Wallachia had 60 development by 1500. What really bothers me is the pace Westernization has, development is a secondary (but still important) issue.
Even then development is in better shape now then in the first 1.12, or that version where Wallachia had 60 development by 1500. What really bothers me is the pace Westernization has, development is a secondary (but still important) issue.
- 1
The purpose of development is different in each game. In CKII you develop mainly to increase the amount of troops you can get with money being a secondary resource. In VickyII you develop mainly for the industrial points and in EUIV you develop mainly to get more money because money is the most important resource (even if a bit to common) because money means military domination.
If development now also cost money it would be pretty much usless (naturally this depend on how long it take to pay back) because the purpose of development is to gain money not lose money.
First point is a no no but the second is a possibility if it cost something else then money. A suggestion would be some sort of goverment points (not a monarch point thing) which you will also use for example to reform your despotic monarchy into a more enlightened despotism, a suggestion I posted some months ago.
Best solution, and maybe the only one that is actually a good one, the cooldown would increase with each previous development. Technology and certain buildings such as university would reduce the cooldown. Could work in combination with the goverment point system.
No thanks, losing development because you develop to much is not fun, it would be like losing provinces because you control to many.
Punish minor countries that way is not a good solution, use cooldown instead.
Do you complain about that Iroquois can take over large parts of the world and such? You should atleast tell us why the development system is broken because not everyone may hold the same view.
I don't think many people here would say the game is broken because you can conquer most of the world with Iroquois so why is development system broken?
The advertisement did never say something like absoulute but just unparallel, thus the game don't claim to be completely historical correct. Also depth and freedom don't have anything to do with realism at all and development system can be seen as a way to increase both of these, increase 2 for maybe a loss in the third but given that development did happen, the development system could be to increase all 3.
Given also that freedom and depth are stated before historical accuracy could be recognized as they consider freedom and depth more important then historical accuracy.
Last edited:
I have been racking my brain over this. And have come up with another new idea, probably just as worthless as the rest of mine. OK, one minor change to the current system is all it takes. Using Wallachia and the Ottomans as an example.... In the current system, Wallachia grows to huge levels of development, then the OE declares war and wins and takes 1 province. As soon as peace is declared, the Ottoman Empire gets the chance to redistribute the development points to any of the their provinces. This accomplishes several things, including making the Wallachia territories gained more palatable to core. It also allows small nations to still be playable (even though they were also before), it also allows large nations to develop their cities through conquest (like transfering a conquered foes wealth and artifacts to your home domains). It would also have to give pause to smaller nations from just spamming development because it would also make them a target for large nations. The transfer of development points could be cut down too so that for every 3 points you take from your wallachian conquest, you only get 1 in return so that large empires do not just grow out of control.
- 1
By sane, you must mean it was complete garbage. If they add a mechanism and that mechanism is completely useless, what's the point? People are just going to have to get used to the peaceful AI developping their provinces.
Plus, only Europe really has to deal with really high dev levels since Paradox completely crippled anywhere else's ability to do it.
somewhere in this topic somebody posted a picture of an OPM in africa that is 3 times more developed than the cities in europe. in the 1500's... also from 1.13
- 2
- 1
From a purely gameplay perspective, small countries developing is fine. However, some degree of plausibility needs to exist. The fact that small countries CAN develop more shouldn't mean all small countries DO develop more. There needs to be other limiting factors. I think making time and money a factor would help significantly with this aspect. Making development purely based on monarch points is too arbitrary.
- 2
Reading the way you expressed it, I agree about adding money to it now. The monarchy points benefit a smaller nation, while gold usually favors a larger nation. It balances development, but the problem then becomes how do small nations stay viable. Which is easily done by making Proclaim Guarantee no longer cost a diplomatic relationship slot for nations of a smaller size. That way small nations can form defensive coalitions. That gives the small nations the ability to survive, and also balances development better.
- 1
Money is a poor solution compared to cooldown because the point with development is to gain money not to lose money. Cooldown can by itself remove the existence of super developed provinces.
- 2
- 1
That is complete garbage. I never played CK2, but in victoria 2 you build infrastructure to improve your economy (more money and trade dominance), be more independend from imports and reduce taxes to make your people lucky. All this is paid with money and not with imaginary currency. If you have free trade in government you dont ven have to pay it, the capitalist buy everything.
WITH FREE TRADE YOU EVEN HAVE TO PAY THE INFRASTRUCTURE OR MANUFACTURIES....!!!
And money isnt the most worth currency in EU IV. Manpower and force limit are the more limiting factors early game. And even you have plenty of money, you never have really enough monarch points. All you can do is get 3 lvl 3 advisors, thats it. Monarch power is always the limiting factor, especially if you are non western (which is the majority of the world).
Also complete garbage. You conquer provinces to get stronger and be able to conquer more provinces. You pay with ducats for temples and workshops to get more ducats. Why should this not be true to development? Its the compound interest effect... pay something from value to get more of that value.
One point of development in VickyII is to gain more money but the main point is to get industrial points because the only way to get industrial points is to build industries or capture provinces with industries.
Money is the most important currency, you can even purchase manpower in form of mercenaries, money directly translate into power in EUIV, the only problem is that money is maybe a bit too common.
With money comes military with military comes conquest with conquest comes money and this is called snowballing. One reason why the development system was created was to limit the power of military conquest. Development have become what coring is for conquest and builidings have become what military are for conquest.
Actually the buildings should be seen as a multiplier on development, the money cost of buildings should be seen as a way to encourage people to build buildings in only developed provinces which in turn encourage focus development on only a few provinces instead of developing wide.
Buildings and development may serve the same purpose but it is development that builds the core the building can stand on which is why one cost monarch points and one cost money.
Money is the most important currency, you can even purchase manpower in form of mercenaries, money directly translate into power in EUIV, the only problem is that money is maybe a bit too common.
With money comes military with military comes conquest with conquest comes money and this is called snowballing. One reason why the development system was created was to limit the power of military conquest. Development have become what coring is for conquest and builidings have become what military are for conquest.
Actually the buildings should be seen as a multiplier on development, the money cost of buildings should be seen as a way to encourage people to build buildings in only developed provinces which in turn encourage focus development on only a few provinces instead of developing wide.
Buildings and development may serve the same purpose but it is development that builds the core the building can stand on which is why one cost monarch points and one cost money.