EU4 - Development Diary - 12th of January 2021

[Alyosha]

I don’t understand why there are people so salty about the addition of these tags. In which way does it impact their ability to enjoy the game? If anything it will make colonization of the region more strategic (managing and prioritizing resources, including RL resources like time and attention) than just sending a colonist and waiting.

A litany of reasons:

1. AI can’t handle colonization of occupied lands

2. These small conflicts are some of the most tedious in terms of gameplay

3. If there are tags in Australia the a Catholic CN will NOT go to war against minor tags in the region because of flawed Tordesillas mechanics (these applies to all that shiny new content in North America too)

Broadly it’s content-creep when there’s so much more enrichment that could be done in areas that derive it more. Please give me the tires trope that “devs can focus on more areas than one.” How about the devs shelving these side projects for a personal mod and looking at areas where most of us play and fixing/adding content?

 

[Alyosha]

Is there a way for me to get any bug fixed that come with this DLC with none of the new content? I’d sign up for that.

 

[IndigoRage]

A litany of reasons:

1. AI can’t handle colonization of occupied lands

2. These small conflicts are some of the most tedious in terms of gameplay

3. If there are tags in Australia the a Catholic CN will NOT go to war against minor tags in the region because of flawed Tordesillas mechanics (these applies to all that shiny new content in North America too)

Broadly it’s content-creep when there’s so much more enrichment that could be done in areas that derive it more. Please give me the tires trope that “devs can focus on more areas than one.” How about the devs shelving these side projects for a personal mod and looking at areas where most of us play and fixing/adding content?

1. Europe didn't actually colonize or control any of these areas before the end date. Even Australia was only partially settled. There are still 17 open provinces.

2. I don't understand what the actual justification for not including them with this argument is.

3. Again, Europe didn't do this within the game's timeframe, but in principal I find this point convincing.

I've never argued that devs are capable of multi-tasking, I'm saying in general devs do what they're hired to do. It's my understanding that a content designer is not hired to fix bugs. You get the same "why don't you fix bugs" comments on art DDs, artists being even less likely to fix bugs. Europe does get plenty of attention. Literally the last major expansion with a year long development cycle was about Europe.

If there's any bug I want them to fix immediately it's the late game slowdown, which is a much more serious issue in terms of CPU usage than a dump of a handful of tags in 1444 is ever going to be.

 

[BrytonJSwan]

Don't play coy, you know exactly what it means. I'm part Samoan but I won't even pretend for a second that polynesian history had even a tenth the impact on the world as european history.
Edit: Just saw your deluge of other posts. Is it really necessary to run damage-control for a B-tier development studio? Let's do away with the rose-colored glasses and respectively inquire about what in fact makes EU a fun series. Games need good gameplay, these additions have a definite opportunity cost, and for non-modders, they are a blight on the game design. If players want to play with polynesian tags, they can always mod the game or use the custom nation tool. Polynesia in EU4 is like Bethesda adding guns to Skyrim that cannot be removed.

I think you've gotten me confused for some else. The post you replied to was the only post I made defending the new content and only one of three posts I made in this thread overall.

Anyway, why does playing a nation from a region that didn't have a large impact on world history in this time period make it a meme? I promise I'm not being coy it's just that, in my opinion, alternate history is a major selling point of this game and taking a minor nation and turning them into a world power is part of that. Like, is it a meme to play as any of the non-major nations?

You're right, there is an opportunity cost. This is just my opinion, but I definitely think taking a region that wasn't playable at all and adding a bunch of content to it is actually a better use of time than adding more mission trees and provinces to Europe, a region that's already chock full of content (not that I mind more European content, I like that too.) You could make the "this should just be a mod" argument about literally any new content they could possibly add.

As a final note, I don't really understand your Skyrim analogy. Obviously it would be weird if a game in a fantasy setting had guns in it. Why is it weird that a game set in the early modern period, that features nations from every part of the world, might also have nations from polynesia in it?

 

[PrussicAcid]

I'm not sure I will play any of these new TAGs but I have nothing against their addition to the game, especially if it's done the good way like presented here. I just hope none of them will randomly ally to the first european superpower they encounter.

But (out of the scope) my main concern remains: what about Emperor of China and tributary states when Ming dynasty collapses? Easy fix to be honest... For huge consequences...

 

[grommile]

Is there a way for me to get any bug fixed that come with this DLC with none of the new content? I’d sign up for that.

Map changes and new playable countries in the 1444 start are always part of the free update and cannot be skipped.

They can, however, be modded out.

 

[Arizal]

It seems interesting, even though I never read the part about the missions, but to be honest, I fear a bit what it could mean for the game. A new TAG means at least 14 000 monarch points laying around, so those polynesians would almost necessarily develop their islands, breaking completely balance of the region. Those islands would be ridiculously inflated.

Also, as some people say, it's a bit of a stretch to pretend that those natives could work on the same model as other civilizations.

 

[Arthrodira]

I am sorry to use such strong language, and I sincerely do not mean to insult anyone. This is not a blanket statement about everyone but a commentary on a disturbing trend. If you feel like I am unfairly representing you, please just assume that you are not one of the people I am talking about. However, especially in light of recent events at the US Capitol, I find some of these comments regarding Polynesia to be rude, ignorant, and insulting. And I feel the need to write what many of us are undoubtedly thinking.

Every single time PDX expands gameplay outside of Europe in this game or any other we see a ridiculous string of comments criticizing the decision as a waste of time, as a lack of depth, as lazy DLC, or as a meme. Many of these comments are simply the logical consequences of thinly veiled xenophobia and racism against non-Europeans. Most of us, I hope and assume, are tired of it. You may only want to play as a European, but don't force other people into accepting your single-minded cultural biases, and maybe just maybe you should consider playing as one of these new tags. Maybe it will open your eyes to the value in other cultures.

If you truly are not a racist and not a xenophobe, and you disagree with this map expansion, then as I said, please assume I am not talking about you; maybe just be more careful with your language in the future so as to distance yourself from these people. But if you are using this game to advance such a heinous mindset, then shame on you; don't try to bully others into your ignorant positions and ideologies. I am always embarrassed and saddened that this forum needs to pin a reminder against racial/ethnic slurs to the top (but heartened that most people take these things as seriously as they are).

Again sorry to be polemical, there is probably a better way to say this, but I cannot get it off my mind. I do not want an internet fight, so I will not be engaging in any arguments that may or may not follow this post.

EDIT: In further discussion it became clear that this comment caused some confusion. I just want to clarify that I am not saying that everyone who is uninterested in these new tags is x or y. I just wanted to draw attention to the biases people bring to the table and how some language could be interpreted very negatively. Eurocentrism and Anglo-centrism have been suggested as better terms. To be clear again, I am not specifically calling out or accusing anyone.

 

[IndigoRage]

I am sorry to use such strong language, and I sincerely do not mean to insult anyone. This is not a blanket statement about everyone but a commentary on a disturbing trend. If you feel like I am unfairly representing you, please just assume that you are not one of the people I am talking about. However, especially in light of recent events at the US Capitol, I find some of these comments regarding Polynesia to be rude, ignorant, and insulting. And I feel the need to write what many of us are undoubtedly thinking.

Every single time PDX expands gameplay outside of Europe in this game or any other we see a ridiculous string of comments criticizing the decision as a waste of time, as a lack of depth, as lazy DLC, or as a meme. Many of these comments are simply the logical consequences of thinly veiled xenophobia and racism against non-Europeans. Most of us, I hope and assume, are tired of it. You may only want to play as a European, but don't force other people into accepting your single-minded cultural biases, and maybe just maybe you should consider playing as one of these new tags. Maybe it will open your eyes to the value in other cultures.

If you truly are not a racist and not a xenophobe, and you disagree with this map expansion, then as I said, please assume I am not talking about you; maybe just be more careful with your language in the future so as to distance yourself from these people. But if you are using this game to advance such a heinous mindset, then shame on you; don't try to bully others into your ignorant positions and ideologies. I am always embarrassed and saddened that this forum needs to pin a reminder against racial/ethnic slurs to the top (but heartened that most people take these things as seriously as they are).

Again sorry to be polemical, there is probably a better way to say this, but I cannot get it off my mind. I do not want an internet fight, so I will not be engaging in any arguments that may or may not follow this post.

You might worded it a bit too strongly, but I do agree in principal that there is a line of thought through which people treat anything outside of Europe or not directly impacting Europe getting attention in this game as an unimportant waste of time. I don't think it would be a stretch to say there's at least a little chauvinist sentiment behind that sometimes.

The title of the game can be pretty unfortunate sometimes, but a game called "Europa Universalis" is going to encourage that line of thought no matter what.

 

[Sete]

I will have to disagree because you are jumping to conclusions.

There are worse discrepancies within european countries that have not been adress properly. (Looking at Iberia which is the area I play more frequently and know more about).
Not being interested does not mean disregard or hate.

For example devs put Portugal and Castille/Spain as historical friends while disregarding the bloody conflict between the 2 nations since their inception. I consider that distasteful and disrespectful. Where do we draw the line?

 

[IndigoRage]

I will have to disagree because you are jumping to conclusions.

There are worse discrepancies within european countries that have not been adress properly.
Not being interested does not mean disregard or hate.

I think Arthrodira is addressing the "this is a waste of time, focus more on Europe" mentality rather than just people who think Europe needs more work. I mean I personally think Northern Europe desperately needs more work, but I don't think RTW is a waste of dev time. That's why I said it was probably worded too strongly. People who just want more Europe fixes are going to feel unfairly lumped into that.

 

[Arizal]

@Arthrodira Since I just wrote on this thread, I'll try to explain my position better : it's not that the game has no place for polynesians, it's just that it's representing settled civilisations who increased in number and in "raw power" over the course of centuries. If anything, I think that what should be overhauled is the development system. The game was originally made in the late '90s. It had in mind the expansion of European polities and of their colonial offsprings, not the alternative histories of those people they historically subjugated.

If we keep in mind that there is such a thing as a range of plausibility between the current situation and a situation in which the polynesians and Maori would have become major world powers, I find it dubious that they would always have so much "development" at the end of the game or that their influence in the grand scheme of things would be so immense that conquering their islands would need a major military presence. This is in comparison to the current situation in-game, where the europeans only needed to "colonize" their lands.

The game represents poorly how every nation didn't thrive in numbers and infrastructure. That's all I'm saying for my part.

 

[Xetfield]

I wouldn't mind having these countries in the Pacific, but for the love of God, devs should have some consistency. I'm still bitter about removal of Buryatia from the game, since it wasn't "enough" to be country somehow. Also, any conversion into Vicky 2 will be even more bonkers than it's actually right now.

 

[IndigoRage]

@Arthrodira Since I just wrote on this thread, I'll try to explain my position better : it's not that the game has no place for polynesians, it's just that it's representing settled civilisations who increased in number and in "raw power" over the course of centuries. If anything, I think that what should be overhauled is the development system. The game was originally made in the late '90s. It had in mind the expansion of European polities and of their colonial offsprings, not the alternative histories of those people they historically subjugated.

If we keep in mind that there is such a thing as a range of plausibility between the current situation and a situation in which the polynesians and Maori would have become major world powers, I find it dubious that they would always have so much "development" at the end of the game or that their influence in the grand scheme of things would be so immense that conquering their islands would need a major military presence. This is in comparison to the current situation in-game, where the europeans only needed to "colonize" their lands.

The game represents poorly how every nation didn't thrive in numbers and infrastructure. That's all I'm saying for my part.

I agree. Monarch points directly equating to development is the main culprit here. Some sort of soft population mechanic is sorely needed in future installments of the franchise.

 

[IndigoRage]

I wouldn't mind having these countries in the Pacific, but for the love of God, devs should have some consistency. I'm still bitter about removal of Buryatia from the game, since it wasn't "enough" to be country somehow. Also, any conversion into Vic two will be even more bonkers than it's actually right now.

As a convertaboo I'll say I'd much rather have this state of affairs (especially considering they'll def convert as primitive) than for all of these to be direct cores of Egypt, lol.

 

[Sete]

I think Arthrodira is addressing the "this is a waste of time, focus more on Europe" mentality rather than just people who think Europe needs more work. I mean I personally think Northern Europe desperately needs more work, but I don't think RTW is a waste of dev time. That's why I said it was probably worded too strongly. People who just want more Europe fixes are going to feel unfairly lumped into that.

I know. I understand where he is coming from hence I edited a longer response after your reply (you might have missed it)
In some parts I do agree with him, but for example I would like to see a few more fixes around the areas most commonly played before addressing others.
But like I said I like new tags, but I would prefer issues, like mercenaries absurd size, to be adressed first.

 

[IndigoRage]

I know. I understand where he is coming from hence I edited a longer response after your reply (you might have missed it)
In some parts I do agree with him, but for example I would like to see a few more fixes around the areas most commonly played before addressing others.
But like I said I like new tags, but I would prefer issues, like mercenaries absurd size, to be adressed first.

Considering I assume you're Portuguese this probably especially burns considering the treatment you got in Golden Century. A patch can be a blessing but ti can also be a curse, because if you aren't as good as you want after the patch it'll be ages or never until another rework. Is there a place we can see different devs actual roles in development? It would be nice to know who to actually take grievances to.

 

[Arizal]

I agree. Monarch points directly equating to development is the main culprit here. Some sort of soft population mechanic is sorely needed in future installments of the franchise.

That or maybe they could get rid of the idea that every country can make the same amount of monarch points. Instead, they could make it so that bigger countries can make more monarch points than smaller, with modifiers on technology and ideas for small countries. It would mean a small country would have a harder time developping itself, because it wouldn't have the ressources to double it's size in development by the sheer might of its inhabitants. A small country would also have a harder time coring and culturally convert, though.

This would have the potential to fix the enormous HRE and the Polynesians islands becoming the size of Paris.

 

[IndigoRage]

That or maybe they could get rid of the idea that every country can make the same amount of monarch points. Instead, they could make it so that bigger countries can make more monarch points than smaller, with modifiers on technology and ideas for small countries. It would mean a small country would have a harder time developping itself, because it wouldn't have the ressources to double it's size in development by the sheer might of its inhabitants. A small country would also have a harder time coring and culturally convert, though.

This would have the potential to fix the enormous HRE and the Polynesians islands becoming the size of Paris.

That would also severely hurt trade cities in the HRE etc that became major cities like Hamburg though. I feel like they're too abstracted (represent too many things) for it to be fair for them to be distributed that way.

 

[Sete]

Considering I assume you're Portuguese this probably especially burns considering the treatment you got in Golden Century. A patch can be a blessing but ti can also be a curse, because if you aren't as good as you want after the patch it'll be ages or never until another rework. Is there a place we can see different devs actual roles in development? It would be nice to know who to actually take grievances to.

You are indeed correct. I have tempered myself not to get the blood boiling over this.
And by this I mean Golden Century.
I feel scammed to be honest. I had a bit of hope for 1.30, and then I saw the absurd content and military idea Portugal got.
It felt like meme content, and it's the hill I will die on.
Better people than me gave so much spectacular feedback for Iberia, all completely ignored. Its frustrating. Hence why I wont be telling people, they should not have their new tags, it would be hypocritical of me.