EU4 - 1.10 - Full Patch Notes

[Krajzen]

My favourites

1) Offensive group nerf by removing Forced March and putting it in tech 9 is brilliant idea. Not only it nerfs overpowered idea group significantly but by introducing 'universal Forced March' it makes wars even more interesting as FM is cool strategical dilemma: +50% movespeed at cost of unability to regenerate and monarch points... Also: buff for Economic.

2) Primitive tech groups are no longer allowed to build ships.

I know this one is controversial but I love it. It is very realistic and yes it makes New World nations harder but I'm okay with that because when I was playing as Iroquis the ease of spamming heavy ships and defeating naval superpowers of Europe was ridiculous and anticlimatic. Also, surviving onslaught as native American should be difficult.

3) AI beng able to pick idea groups dynamically if define is changed, rasie/reduce autonomy so I will no longer see failed states with 80% autonomy in every province...

4) Chinese flavor events now updated to take Qing into account.

OH GOD YES. I screamed for this change. Ming is horrible to play as but Qing is already very interesting and this change gives it essentially over 30 unique national events!

5) Ability to form Poland with Mazovia/Cracow/Danzig and unique Polish Magnate rebels.

6) Ideas for Kurds, Benin and Ceylon - I was looking forward to all these countries. Also: Ichma, Johor, Caribi, Perak, Nuremberg, Australia and Aquilea

7) Added Leonese tag and culture which means finally Castille is able to break on something smaller; it was the only country in the world impossible to rebel-reduce to anything smaller than powerhouse.

8) Bugfixes:

- Breaking a Royal Marriage with a rival is no longer a stability hit. - I love this one so much

- Rebels revolt against the province owner rather than the province controller (but will still siege the controller). - Finally less broken rebels

- 'Can now set religions to allow declaring war through regency.' which means there will be a mod removing war penalty of regency council for all nations

- Jewish and Norse religion, thus possibility to easily add them to starting provinces with changing province history!

- Colonial Guyana removed, created so awful borders

- Siberian Clans finally having correct unit skins

9) Terrain map revised, added Drylands, Steppes, Farmlands, Savannas, Highlands - I love it. Especially climatic Savannas and Steppes.


Though

- Reduced the reduction in cost of reducing war exhaustion for some national ideas.

...

 

[WeissRaben]

Genocide, basically. Whether that be by outright killing them (as sometimes happened) or by just flooding them with foreigners (the colonizing nation's primary culture) until they were bred out. These are both genocide, so yeah.

It was actually really weird that when you colonize land that had natives but was uncolonized you were basically just settling down a city and wiping out the natives or relegating them to insignifigance, but when you colonize land that you took from a native nation somehow you couldn't do this and had to wait a long time.

It was doubly nonsensical since some of the native tribes ingame don't really correspond all that much to the tribes as they actually were, so we can't really say "oh the ones that have tags ingame are the larger tribes, the others are minor different tribes). Mikmaq for example starts as an OPM at the very bottom of Nova Scotia; if we were being historical it'd have all of modern Nova Scotia and the east coast of New Brunswick, albeit with very high autonomy in all provinces.

It didn't make sense to say, oh, the colonising nation can easily put their people here here and here, but not this one particular province. Now it works properly.

Natives everywhere in the Americas fought on for decades after conquest. There was a Maya uprising in Mexico well into the 19th Century. It's just more lip service to "waaaah why can't I eat everything in the Americas in one go even though it took the Spanish 70 to 160 years to conclude their conquests".

 

[Krajzen]

Natives everywhere in the Americas fought on for decades after conquest. There was a Maya uprising in Mexico well into the 19th Century. It's just more lip service to "waaaah why can't I eat everything in the Americas in one go even though it took the Spanish 70 to 160 years to conclude their conquests".

+1

- North American Indians resisting colonialism till early 20th century
- Araucans being absurdly succesfull in their wars with Spanish, annexed only in 19th century
- Guarani and Aymara resistance till 18th-19th century
- Incan wars stretching basically through the entire 16th...

 

[Peachrocks]

A few questions:

1. I had a feeling the 100% coalition warscore thing wouldn't last as it was pretty ridiculous. That said, what DOES push it to 100% in a coalition war? Is it 100% on WL after 5 years (like all other wars), or only by occupying 100% of all coalition provinces? I'm interested in seeing how that join logic works in practice.

2. Do subjects core at negative stability? Has their tendency to simply stop converting province religions they can convert easily been fixed?

I'm not a big fan of "primitives can't build ships", because it's the kind of setup that will too greatly expose natives to screwjobs from blind colonial conquest. Once you actually border a nation it's fine, but in the current patch colonial conquest CB AIs will sit on wars even at high war scores and refuse to 1) make demands 2) take suggestions for peace 3) accept anything in the peace deal screen, even 100% worth. Unless something has changed there is going to be a little too much luck element in "screwed by CC at random before you can react" going on IMO, though I suppose native councils experienced that to a degree already and they are better than other new world starts in 1.9 so maybe I'm not picturing how it will progress properly.

Yeah this is ridiculous. The Eurobabies do NOT need more babying. I agree it's stupid for the natives to build Carracks and such to stop the Euros from landing but it's equally stupid for Euros to have 6 regiments conquer massive native tribes without blinking. Plague, fortunate circumstances and native allies were far bigger factors in the relative ease of the conquest of the Americas, not 'Europe is so friggin awesome111!!!!'.

A simple solution would be to allow reform after two or so years at war with a western power in addition to the core thing but it's not the only way. I really dislike playing native starts at the moment simply because Europe goes "lololoolololol look at my uber easy mode CB hurrhurrrhurr, I'm gunna send my entire army to you, sit on your massive empire forever stopping you doing anything won't take any demands until I get call for peace hurrhurrhurr1111!!!!!"

 

[Junuxx]

You would still pay for the empty regiments. In most cases, it would be better to just rebuild them later rather than paying for skeleton regiments.

Maybe, but it's much less micro to deal with if you can just keep and retreat the empty regiments.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Also, surviving onslaught as native American should be difficult.

There is a non-trivial difference between "difficult" and "random". Being insta-gibbed by the nooby CB (aka colonial conquest) will put you in situations where your soldiers can't win battles. It's a situation where Mesoamerica is denied ships because it's "ahistorical" but it's still okay for Europeans to ship 25000 soldiers to the new world before 1550.

That stinks something fowl, and it's impossible for a rational human being to justify both simultaneously in that context.

Meanwhile, any time you can border them before they land 20k on you, you can then reform and all of a sudden you can win on land just as easily (if not easier) than you previously could at sea.

How is this an improvement? It's a one sided change, coupled with the unsettling "no nationalism in primitives" rule, but a lot more harmful to players using these nations (not having nationalism wouldn't matter to humans using natives much, ships matter much more). Did Wiz think natives were too strong? I'd love to see him defend such a statement...you know, the *gameplay* reason he himself said he'd need to take an argument seriously. A history argument alone is an instant failure based on his own criteria, after all.

Still, it's not a big deal in the scheme of things, just an annoying reminder of PI's overt bias in representing history only in some areas and being incapable of defending their changes. That's w/e. However, if subject nations still don't work it's another matter entirely ^_^.

 

[kitemasaki]

I'd love to see him defend such a statement...you know, the *gameplay* reason he himself said he'd need to take an argument seriously. A history argument alone is an instant failure based on his own criteria, after all.

You keep hitting it out of the ballpark today in my opinion. I couldn't agree more. I don't see why this change was necessary. Anybody trying to tie it to history will ultimately fail and shouldn't even bother using that as justification. Wiz has already commented on a similar issue when players complain about rebel sizes, that it is more about giving the player a challenge rather than give historical accuracy. So I don't understand how removing nationalism from 'primitives' is in line with keeping it a challenge. This just sounds like somebody in the studio wanted to do something because they were bored and decided to stir up forum rabble.

 

[josh127]

1) Offensive group nerf by removing Forced March and putting it in tech 9 is brilliant idea. Not only it nerfs overpowered idea group significantly but by introducing 'universal Forced March' it makes wars even more interesting as FM is cool strategical dilemma: +50% movespeed at cost of unability to regenerate and monarch points... Also: buff for Economic.
.

Making forced march free is not a nerf to offensive, but rather a nerf to the Americas. All those colonizers who you can't build ships to try to stop, get a CB they're more than happy to abuse, and can kill you 5 vs 30 now can even chase you down when you shattered retreat. Offensive though got a new bonus. It's not a great bonus, but it's yet another bonus on top of still getting Forced March.

 

[oblio-]

I admit to not have played many games in the Americas, but from what I've seen, if you blob hard enough, westernize and become Christian, survival as a native is hard but doable. I've done it as a Midwestern Totemist OPM, surely it's doable as a Meso American/South American, especially Christian ones. No ships, I was inland, just plain old prolonging the war and giving some provinces to get out. Lost 1 war badly, second war still badly, third war was a draw, next wars... recovery and punishment.

But by the time Euros come in force you need to eat everything you see. And also colonize as much as possible.

Different strats are needed, true.

 

[Krajzen]

There is a non-trivial difference between "difficult" and "random". Being insta-gibbed by the nooby CB (aka colonial conquest) will put you in situations where your soldiers can't win battles. It's a situation where Mesoamerica is denied ships because it's "ahistorical" but it's still okay for Europeans to ship 25000 soldiers to the new world before 1550.

OK, but there is one problem: either we make Europeans able to ship 25 000 armies to America or we restrict their numbers but create Colombian Epidemic mechanic which wipes out 90% of indigenous population (in eu4: -90% of manpower, economy, army decreasing slowly over decades).

The first one is unfair, the second one - historical version - is really impossible.

IRL Europeans conquered Mesoamerica and Andes due to combination of:
1) Epidemics, main reason and as I mentioned, extremely unfair if put in a game
2) Many small coincidences very unlucky for natives, impossible to simulate
3) Divisions between natives which greatly weakened their states prior to European invasion, like anti-Aztec alliance and civil war ongoing among Incas at time of Pizarro arriving
(not to mention the fact than Andes have lost over half of population to epidemics even before Pizarro invasion, due to germs travelling way faster than Spaniards)
4) ...and resulting Indian Allies of conqustadors, literally tens of thousand of auxillaries
5) Overrated though still significant technological advantage of Spaniards -> guns, cavalry, armors, as well as cultural doctrine of cynic total war as opposed to ritual wars of natives.


The thing which further complicates all of it is, AI colonial powers should be able to generally overpower most of natives while human/AI natives should have some way to survive... This is very hard to balance. I guess the perfection would be something like 'if you manage to create strong empire in Mesoamerica/Andes and European forces arrive, you are able to overcome them with attrition, wit and numerical advantage and later adopt their weaponry to survive' (well this is roughly how Araucans and succesfull NA natives did it). As I said, balance hell. Personally I think the best result could be achieved with expanding attrition/logistics and adding some guerilla system so such underdogs as Aztec vs Spain or Dai Viet vs Ming could win.

 

[kralex]

You would still pay for the empty regiments. In most cases, it would be better to just rebuild them later rather than paying for skeleton regiments.

IIUC, the point is to be able to consolidate in enemy territory, but keeping the full reinforce potential of all units. I.e., you get to fight with reduced combat width and units of 1000 men each, making the stack much more sturdy when fighting against larger armies, but eventually you'll grow back all units through reinforcements.

 

[Hooves]

# Autonomy
- Can now raise and decrease autonomy.

Couldn't this lead to the AI causing even more revolts? Since it might decrease autonomy on assumptions.

 

[forrseti]

So the natives cant build any type of ship?

Also what does make Liberty Desire increase now for vassals? Does this mean the end of vassal feeding and multiple vassals??!

 

[Promanco]

So Spain who ALWAYS get eaten by France gets nerfed?
I would love to know how France got balanced so they dont just eat at Castille even easier(releasing half the country).

 

[Golladan]

The thing which further complicates all of it is, AI colonial powers should be able to generally overpower most of natives while human/AI natives should have some way to survive... This is very hard to balance.

That balance is already there...

 

[forrseti]

Haven't read through all the comments, but why wasn't the Shahanshah achievement fixed?

Haha that one is so easy, just start as Taberestan and release Persia -> achievement :laugh:

 

[Yoshijoe]

Please tell me that Patriot rebels rarely defecting to the primary tag of their culture was fixed? It is soooo annoying to see Norwegian patriots in Denmark defecting to Sweden even though Norway is still around and bordering those provinces...

 

[Freudia]

Honestly, the only things in this patch that I find immediately unsettling are the 'natives can't build boats' thing and the lack of mentioning of fixing rebel defection logic. Aside from those, this patch looks pretty alright.

Natives being unable to build boats is a complete arbitrary nerf to natives being able to survive getting cross-map blind-declared on with little warning, and I highly doubt that such a nerf is actually required for Europe to actually win vs natives.

 

[Dr. B]

Expansion looks pretty nice, good long list of bugfixes.

It will be interesting to see how the subject liberty desire works out in practice, please make is dangerous enough that a player can once in a while experience a liberation war.

Good call on primitives not magically building sophisticated ocean-going ships, finally.

 

[moyang]

Haha that one is so easy, just start as Taberestan and release Persia -> achievement :laugh:

What he meant is fix that.