• 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.
Sadly it is a victim of the 1 merchant if a CN has 10 provinces. It was either this, creating new provinces, moving provinces from existing regions or combination of the latter two.
Guayana only has 9 provinces at the moment.
Eh, shouldn't Alaska go the same way, then? It has only some 13 or 14 provinces at most. It could very well be merged with California.
 
Nobody protest by the delete of the Guayana Colonial Region?

I protested it, but I'm just a crackpot who wants a Central American CR, a Cascadia one (instead of California going up into British Columbia), and something representing the Audencia of Chile...
 
So, with the ability to play Ironman without achievements for the nation designer, does this mean we can finally use Ironman (achievements disabled, of course) with mods?
 
Sadly it is a victim of the 1 merchant if a CN has 10 provinces. It was either this, creating new provinces, moving provinces from existing regions or combination of the latter two.
Guayana only has 9 provinces at the moment.

I'm slightly annoyed of the removal of the Guayana colonial region too, it helped to define a colonial region more historically. I understand why it was removed, it's their game development and they can do with what they what with it.

Granted I'm not a computer programmer nor am I a game designer but I do question their choice. I am sure there is a lot of work which would need to go into adding another province (or two) or removing at least two more from an neighbouring region to make Guayana have the required 10 provinces. Some people will say it is not worth the work for a useless colonial region but they forget about the new rule. This being the new merchant rule which gives a new merchant for every Colonial Nation which has ten or more provinces. By making the Guayana colonial region just big enough (11-12 provinces) you actually make that colonial region more (if the most) competitive to control, to get that extra merchant. It would add a slight, but interesting, element to the game (especially in MP).
 
How can you claim the removal of cores is completely irrelevant past the initial moves? It's ridiculous, ofcourse being able to take Venetian land without incuring a significant AE and Dip penalty was useful.

Of course it affects things, but it doesn't make survival more difficult, only slows down your expansion. So you could say mid-late game becomes slightly more difficult, at least if you are going for maximum blobbing.

I'd rather they weaken BYZ at the start and readd some of the cores. Like Rhodes, Naxos and Chios, all with a certain historical basis to be a core as well. Paradox could add a modifier to BYZ that reduces their trade and tax income, only to be lifted after they have declared war on the Otto Turks or somesuch.

Completely disagree. The more cores Byzantium gets, the quicker the game runs out of any challenge. They could do with more late game challenge, not less. Contrarily, the start itself doesn't need to be much more difficult (a little would be fine) – I can see how a Purple Phoenix owner would feel cheated out of their content if it became too hard for them to handle. (Some already complain, but it hasn't happened so far. It's been approximately as easy for the past several patches.)
 
- Primitive tech groups are no longer allowed to build ships.
I just wanted to thank the devs for this. It was a huge immersion breaker.

- Conquering primitives no longer gives nationalism for non-primitives.
I have no idea why this was implemented. Native American peoples certainly did rebel.

It'd be nice (for modders) if things like this were properties of tech groups that could be set in the \common\technology.txt file, instead of being implied by the tech group's modifier. Something like
Code:
	north_american = {
		modifier = 2.5
		start_level = 1
		cav_to_inf_ratio = 0.5
		primitive = yes
		no_ships = yes
		limited_nationalism = yes
	}
 
I have no idea why this was implemented. Native American peoples certainly did rebel.

Apparently, it's to discourage rebels from appearing using Western units. But seemingly, religious rebels will still be able to have this advantage just as well as before.
 
Following two bug fixes were not in changelog, appending:
- Fixed a bug where the AI would suffer significantly less attrition than it was supposed to when multiple AI countries shared the same province.
- Fixed a math error that was causing very strange patriot rebel defections.
 
Precisely! And I don't understand why there aren't more complaints about that. Maybe because too few people play Portugal, and with this change, the incentive to play it will be even less.

Well Portugal didn't exactly focus as much on going west as it does in the game,where it literally takes the dominant part of colonizing both South,Central and even North America...
The_Portuguese_Empire.png
 
Following two bug fixes were not in changelog, appending:
- Fixed a bug where the AI would suffer significantly less attrition than it was supposed to when multiple AI countries shared the same province.
- Fixed a math error that was causing very strange patriot rebel defections.
These were by far the most important and you left them out?!? You should stay away from that Johan fellow, he's a bad egg. :p