• 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.

EU4 - Development Diary - 22th of September

Hey everyone! Today is the last day of us talking about the native americans and the rework they are getting. We’ll be talking about the changes to the Federations and the new world setup. As you’ll see on the pictures for the map, a lot of tags have been split up in order to represent federations properly. A prime example is the Iroquois who will now be several tags and start in a federation at game start.

So let’s start with how to form them. Since we are splitting up the federal tags like the Huron and Iroquois I still wanted to retain some kind of identity for them. As such when you invite the first member to form a federation with you, you get the opportunity to also name the Federation. There are some default options scripted that can be based on Tags and Cultures which it will suggest for you, but you can of course just write whatever you want here.

1600776828277.png


We’ve also redone how leadership of the federation is decided. It is no longer decided on the death of the monarch of the leader in the tribe, instead we measure a cohesion value of the Federation. This value changes each month depending on the composition of the Federation but also some external factors. Keep in mind that any numbers & values are work in progress!

1600778713850.png


If cohesion hits 0% then it will trigger a change in leadership. In order to keep the cohesion high you want to keep similar cultures within your federation, however having one or two of a separate culture group won’t really be problematic. Another source of loss of cohesion is also if there are members that are stronger than the leader. For later in the game to help you keep a large federation together, if you have any colonizers on your border it will help you keep it together by having an external threat increasing your cohesion.

If a leadership change is triggered it will try to pick the strongest member to be the new leader, if the leader is the strongest then the federation will be disbanded. This entire process is 100% done in script, from calculation of members strength to what happens during leadership change. Currently for testing the strength is calculated from the max manpower of members and is done as a scripted function with an effect and looks like this:

Code:
calculate_federation_member_strength = {
    effect = {
        export_to_variable = { which = our_manpower value = max_manpower who = THIS }
        set_variable = { which = federation_strength which = our_manpower }

    }
}

Here’s the current list of values that affect your cohesion
  • -1 For every member not of leaders culture group
  • +1 For every member of leaders culture group
  • -1 For every member stronger than the leader
  • +1 for neighboring hostile Europeans

The aim here is to make Federations more something you can count on, instead of having to try and keep your prestige high or stack diplomatic reputation at all times just in case your leader at some random point dies, you can now count on it instead and try to plan around what you need to do in order to keep the leadership position.


Now I’m going to hand it over to a member of our beta program. @Evie HJ who have done the excellent work of reforming North America’s setup making it a much more vibrant and interesting place.

It's a whole (new) New World we live in

The setup for North America hasn’t really changed much at all since the release of Art of War, almost ix years ago – and, as far as the list of playable countries is concerned, since Conquest of Paradise even earlier. The new changes to the Native game mechanics in this patch provided a perfect opportunity to take a new look at a region that has remained largely untouched for a long time.

In some ways, this overhaul is our most ambitious review of the North American setup to date. The province count does fall short of Art of War (though fifty-three new provinces, not counting wastelands, is nothing to sneeze at), but the list of new tags is more than we ever added to North America at any single time. In fact, with fifty-six new tags, we’re adding more North American tags in this one overhaul than we have in the entire history of the Europa Universalis franchise.

Those tags are not evenly spread out across the continent. Two regions (the South-East United States and the Great Lakes and Saint Lawrence) get the lion’s share of the tags. Others like the Great Plains or Hudson Bay, get a handful of provinces or tags. The West Coast, for its part, where we know almost nothing of Indigenous people before the last century or so of the game, was entirely outside the scope of this overhaul. This applies to the provinces as well as the tags: in broad terms, we tried to add provinces in the same general region we were adding tags, to keep the amount of empty (or tribal land) provinces roughly similar.

With twenty-one new tags, it is the South-East United States that receive the most work in this new overhaul. The reason is simple: up until now, the 1444 setup in the game represented the historical situation around 1600-1650. The first 150 years of the game – a time when the last great cities of the Mississippian civilizations flourished in the region (the more northern city, like Cahokia, were likely abandoned by 1444)– were left out entirely. This was the first thing we set out to fix, and the new setup, as a result, emphasize the situation that early European explorers and archaeologists tell us about – not English colonists two centuries later. By and large, most of those new tags are settled nations, and (except the Cherokee) all belong to the Muskogean culture group. This is a compromise for some of them: while they spoke Siouan languages like Catawba, they were heavily influenced by the Southern Appalachian Mississippian culture, and it’s those cultural ties we chose to emphasize.

1600773970686.png


In the new setup, the Creek Confederacy is no longer available at game start, and the Cherokee are reduced to a one-province statelet in the mountains. In their stead, the Coosa Paramount Chiefdom is now the major power of the region. Though a one-province nation in itself, it rules through a network of subject states (Satapo, an area stretching from the Kentucky border to Alabama along the spine of the Appalachians. Surrounding it are a number of smaller, independent chiefdoms, including both sites visited by the De Soto expedition (Altamaha, Cofitachequi, Joara, Ichisi, Chisca, as well as Atahachi, the future home of Chief Tuscaloosa) and of Muskogean towns that would eventually form the seeds of the future Creek Confederacy, like Coweta and Kasihta. Further west, in the valleys of the Mississippi, they are joined not only by more of the chiefdoms documented by De Soto, (Quizquiz, Anilco, Pacaha and Casqui, the last three corresponding to the Menard-Hodges, Nodena and Parkin Mound archaeological sites), but also by the Natchez people, who would, in later century, become the last tribe to embrace Mississippian culture.

Further north, our other focus region was the Great Lakes of North America. Here, the main concern was nothing to do with our setup representing the wrong date (except along the Saint Lawrence, where the Iroquoians of the sixteenth century were mysteriously missing), and everything to do with the fact that the two most famous (con)federations of natives, the Hurons and Iroquois, were represented as monolithic nations with no use for the in-game Federation mechanism. Once it was decided to represent each of the nations making up those two confederations independently, adding in the other relevant nations in the region was an obvious choice. As with the United States South-East, these are largely settled nations of Iroquoian cultures, although a handful of them are migratory instead.

1600773986832.png


This gives us a sizeable five new nations where the one Iroquois tag used to be: Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga and Seneca (plus, starting much further south at game start but not forgotten, the Tuscarora). Opposing them are the less well-known member nations of the Huron Confederacy: Tahontaenrat, Arendaronon, Attignawantan and Attigneenongnahac. In addition to them, we have a selection of minor Iroquoian nations that can struggle to strike the right balance to remain neutral between these two powerful Confederacies. This notably include the aptly named Neutral Nation (Attiwandaron), as well as the Tionontate (or Tobacco Indians), the Wenro of far western New York, and the Erie of Northwest Pennsylvania (plus the already existing Susquehannock). As the last two (Erie, Susquehannock) represent nations that claimed large territory but with very little united government, they are represented as migratory nations. You can think of the migration as representing shifting balance of power among the different villages and groups of their respective nations, rather than actual physical relocation. Also represented as migratory are the first two Iroquoian nations ever encountered by European: Stadacona, on the site of present day Quebec City, and Osheaga (Hochelaga), in present Montreal. In their case, leaving them migratory was the simplest way to enable them to potentially vanish from the Saint Lawrence lowlands, as they did in the late sixteenth century.

Our changes didn’t stop at those new areas, though they received the bulk of the changes. Existing tags that represented larger confederations or culture group were split into (some of) their constituent parts: the Illinois are now represented by the Kaskaskia, Cahokia and Peoria, the Shawnee by Chalahgawtha, Kispoko and Hathawekela, and the Puebloan people expanded from Keres and Pueblo to Acoma, Zia, Ohkay Owingeh and Sandiat. In a similar vein, some particularly large groups that used to be represented by a single tag now have additional tags to represent them: this is the case of the Cree, with the addition of the Nehiyaw (Plains Cree) nation, the Ojibwe, who are now additionally represented by the Mississage for their easternmost group and the Nakawe (or Saulteaux) for their western bands, and the Sioux, now expanded to include the Wichiyena (Western Dakota) and Lakota nations. Historical confederations that were lacking some of their members or needing a boost also gained it: the Iron Confederacy gained the Nehiyaw and Nakawe, described above; the Three Fires now add the Mississage to their alliance, and the Wabanaki Confederacy of North-East North America can now count on the help of the Maliseet and Penobscot as well as the pre-existing Abenaki. Finally, three more tags are added on sheer account of their historical importance in the Colonial era, two as allies of New France, one as ally-turned-enemy of New England: the Algonquin of the Ottawa valley, the Innu of the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, and the Wampanoag of Massachusetts Bay.

1600774009748.png


Along with all these changes, we finally introduced Wasteland mountain ranges to North America. Not in the Rockies (where the handful of connections already represent major passes through the mountains), but rather, in the East, along the Appalachian mountains. While they may not seem like much today, they were formidable obstacle to westward expansion in colonial time, when it was said that there were only five paths from the East Coast westward that could be taken by large groups of people: around the mountains to the south in the Piedmont of Georgia, through the Cumberland gap on the border of Virginia and Tennessee, through the Cumberland Narrows of western Maryland, the Allegheny gaps of Pennsylvania, and finally through the valley of the Mohawk river, in New York. In addition, through it didn’t allow for east-west travel per se, the Great Valley of the Appalachians was another significant route through the region, running from Alabama to Pennsylvania. All of them are now represented in the game, along with the mountains that bordered them.

We also tried to adopt a somewhat consistent standard in the naming of provinces, and revise province names accordingly. The new standard prefers the self-given names of a Native group (tribe, nation, band…) who lived in the region where we can find one. If none can be found, other options include a name given to a local people by a neighboring tribe (provided it’s not derogatory), or a geographic name in a local Native language. In all cases, we now tend to favor native spelling where we are able to find it, though symbols that are particularly unusual in the standard Latin Alphabet may be set aside or approximated for our players’ benefit.


That’s it for today, as usual I’ll answer questions in the thread however there’s one I want to address yet again as it keeps getting asked and I can’t answer every single time it gets asked. People have asked if these features will be applied to South America or the Siberian Natives etc. It all depends on time, the main focus is to rework the North Americans and if I have time I will make sure it plays nice with others that can also benefit but it is not a priority. Next week will have it’s development diary written by Johan.
 
  • 153Like
  • 69Love
  • 9
  • 9
  • 9
Reactions:
Highlighting a few points along the way:

1. Mohawk may be a name of derogatory origin (though that is debated with many less derogatory origins proposed), but it is also the common name of the people in English, and as I understand it is fairly commonly used including by the Mohawk themselves in their dealing with Enflish speakers. That makes it the more recognizable name, and not a name to otherwise avoid (as it appears to be in use by Mohawk organizations). Generally speaking, thise are the names we use for the country tags. Their home province is, however, called Kanien'kehaka.

2. To reiterate what Groogy said, I'm not a Paradox employee in any capacity. I'm a volunteer. The entire map and all the new tags were a personal project, and not something done on Paradox resources at all. It happened because I saw what groogy was working on, had many ideas about changes to north America already, and offered to create a new setup myself. I love doing this, but I don't habe the ability or time to go at it in regions I don't already have solid working knowledge of (Central and North America; Subsaharan Africa).The time and effort required (for something that I am, again, doing on a volunteer basis)are just too much without that existing basis.

3. On the idea that this is the result of a United States-centric perspective: while Ikm certainly biased (we all are), my bias in terms of what parts of history interest me is French Canadian (and thus New France) not American.

4. Central America got its second, post-Art of War overhaul in terms of the map and tags in Golden Century (I did that one too). Personally speaking, I'm not really seeing or feeling a particular urgency to do more there as thing stand. His, of course, is just my personal opinion, highly subject to change, and of course Paradox can come to a very different conclusion.

5. Splitting totemism into many smaller religions is not really an easy task - the number of actual religions we'd need would be very high (at least one per culture goup, often one per culture, sometimes one per tag), with very little information or even individual names for them. The icon is problematic, but so would any other symbol we could use. It may happen some day, but I wouldn't personally see it as a good use of my time right now.
 
Last edited:
  • 7
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Y'see, now I want a mod that
a) Changes the Totemist religion to give additional bonuses based on the culture-group of the nation and
I see a) as a good and easy way to at least gave some flavor to Animism and Totemism:
1- Replace both Animism and Totemism for a religion named "Traditional beliefs"
2- Make spcific bonus related to each culture group when your religion is "Traditional bleiefs"

So you have some representation for the many different and unrelated native religions all around the world, plus some nice unique bonus.
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
Reactions:
I really like that North America is getting any love at all, but I think for it to matter and not just adding more Native cannon fodder, the tribes need to actually be a threat.

In real life, many times Native Americans did try to stop westward expansion by Europeans. An idea that has been floated around would be that colonization should give an AE modifier to neighbouring Native Americans, meaning that if you expand too much too quickly the federation might form a coalition, though this probably is better on theory than on practice, I am sure there is a way to emulate this.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
2. To reiterate what Groogy said, I'm not a Paradox employee in any capacity. I'm a volunteer. The entire map and all the new tags were a personal project, and not something done on Paradox resources at all. It happened because I saw what groogy was working on, had many ideas about changes to north America already, and offered to create a new setup myself. I love doing this, but I don't habe the ability or time to go at it in regions I don't already have solid working knowledge of (Central and North America; Subsaharan Africa).The time and effort required (for something that I am, again, doing on a volunteer basis)are just too much without that existing basis.
I did not known that it was a passion project in free time, sorry if I was looking to demanding about south america, my intention was only to help in case of SA be improved someday, I don't have map editing skills but I have a good knowlowdge in SA history and would be happy to help if it was necessary in the future.
I want a rework for SA but regardless of whether or not it's happen in the next patch, my congratulations to both for the new mechanics, improved "primitive" mechanics and for the new map setup, Mississipi region is one of my favorite regions in America continent and NA will be a much more fun start.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I love everyone's passion for the regions that interest them, really!

There was a time, long ago, when I was pushing for a better North America from the outside, too. It took a long time before things started to change, but they did eventually change.
 
  • 6Like
  • 2
Reactions:
There is no reason to worry, EU4 is maintained by the studio Paradox Tinto, me wanting to do a thing because I want to versus it being a planned thing are two different things you shouldn't conflate.
So if this is all a passion project, when will we get a Dev-Diary about stuff that the EU4-team is working on in their paid work-time?
Also in regards to a South America rework, it's not as if someone hadn't done most of the research already:
 
  • 8
  • 2
Reactions:
I like reading the threads for dev diaries without necessarily posting in them and I have to say that everyone here wants something different and they want it soon.

Before these dev diaries began, everyone was demanding the Americas and South-East Asia. Now that the developers decided to hit 2 birds with 1 stone people are demanding South and Central America because it is not covered. Obviously the devs can only do so much at the same time.

I understand peoples' exasperation but I think many here need to take a bit of a break and understand that the devs don't have six arms to work with like some hindu deity.

Agree. The devs can only focus on one or two places at a time. Central America and South-east Asian where requested aloth. So it would be unfair to start demanding South America or some other place that needs more love from the devs. Thats the same as a child who demands candy and when you give it candy it starts to demand ice cream.

I understand that this is how you guys feel from your point of view and I respect it.

But from my point of view, this (the demand for more South American flavor) is not something that was ever satisfactorily addressed. You can look at the map previously posted about how North American tags used to look like. It was terrible, obviously, but at the very start of the game's development process it was already better than what we currently have for South America (excluding Andean cultures, I concede, but the Incans not being represented would be a crime, honestly).

And for every missed opportunity, be it Conquest of Paradise, El Dorado, Golden Century, or now, a little bit of a sour taste was left in my mouth. And now that we know that Australia is getting an update, it's quite clear that South America is the one region left in the dust, and we have just no indication whatsoever from Paradox, anything at all, about any plan to work on making it better.

Again, even if these updates are, from the dev's perspective, the result of their passion used in their free time, from my point of view of a consumer it doesn't matter in the end, it will all translate into content in the game... I obviously applaud their effort, it can only be a net positive in the end, but the neglect in content for my area of interest remains the same.

More than being a child who was fed candy and now demands ice cream, I feel like the poor child whose middle class cousin finally received his long demanded PS4 while I never ever had a videogame.

You can call it victimism, an annoying rant, anything you like, and I would maybe agree, but it's all honest frustration.
 
  • 3
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
So if this is all a passion project, when will we get a Dev-Diary about stuff that the EU4-team is working on in their paid work-time?
We already have, actually! The last 1-2 months worth of Dev-Diaries have all been about the Southeast Asia rework. It (plus any unannounced DLC) has been the primary focus of the dev team, and we’ve gotten quite a bit of info about it already if you look back over the past couple months. The last two DDs and this one are detailing the NA changes, which is effectively bonus content since it’s a side-project on Groogy’s part that he and Evie have worked on in their spare time, but the team as a whole has been discussing the actual stuff work-time side of the content update ever since they came back from their month-long Swedish vacation, prior to these last few DDs and starting again with next week’s DD.

The one thing we don’t know is if this is just a free update or if it’s gonna be accompanied by a DLC of any kind, but that may very well be what Johan talks about next week.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Sadly, South America being ignored is, simply put, just buisness as usual in EU4, or dare i say Paradox at large, considering the awful state of Brazil in the HoI series (Remember Socialist Getúlio in HoI3? Or how botched the map is in 4.) and Victoria series (Rio Grande do Sul not in revolt in 1835 being an egregious omission).

While the USA gets all the love, all the time, being a region almost entirely ignored due to its lack of wealth for most of the timeframe, and whose entire appeal to colonizers was based on fur trade, the true heart of the modern age economy, the source of europe's silver and wealth, South America, is relagated to the worst and most neglected region in the entire game, including ''climate'' borders that actually follow Brazil's national borders, ''animist'' religion depicting boars, an animal not native to the New World, and a lower tag density than Siberia in Brazil and Argentina, and some of these tags like Tupinambá are incredibly misplaced, by distances as long as those between Spain and Sweden. Tag density for Colonial Nations is also incredibly low. The real stinger is the stated of interest from the devs in game about the age where South America was fundamentally the most important continent on every concievable matter compared to Central and North America. It shows why the Colonization system is as flawed and as bland as it is right now: its entirely based, and only based, in North America, very especifically the United States. Several expansions supposedly focusing in the new world have come out, and most South America remains ignored in a deep fashion, doubly so outside of the Andean region. And dont even get me started on the terrain, for its extremely confusing across the entire continent, Porto Alegre being in a swamp is borderline comedic.

It just seems to me hopless from my point of view, and not worth stressing over it. Just realize that Paradox doesnt really have any interest whatsoever in South America, because that's what its history, recent and otherwise, points towards. This NA patch is this some stuff being cooked up on the side, and so we can only hope for better pastures in a future, proper and focused look at the region. Golden Century willfully ignoring anything outside of the Caribbean certainly stings, however...
 
Last edited:
  • 8
  • 2Like
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
We already have, actually! The last 1-2 months worth of Dev-Diaries have all been about the Southeast Asia rework. It (plus any unannounced DLC) has been the primary focus of the dev team ...
Do you have any inside info that I don't? Because it is pretty common knowledge that SEA is indeed NeonDT's passion-project.

Which of course brings up two questions:
- How much of the SEA-rework did Neon do in his spare-time?
- Are we only getting passion projects now?

If you know more please enlighten us.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
4. Central America got its second, post-Art of War overhaul in terms of the map and tags in Golden Century (I did that one too). Personally speaking, I'm not really seeing or feeling a particular urgency to do more there as thing stand.
So you are saying that PDX let an outsider who has no interest in South America and does not speak (much) Spanish handle the rework of South America in the DLC that focussed on the major colonisers Spain and Portugal? And now the same person is saying: "There is no need for a rework."
Mind blown.
(P.S. Did you even look at the link I provided above? Because the guys posting it are South-Americans and pretty deep into local history and might disagree with your take.)
 
Last edited:
  • 11
  • 3Like
Reactions:
So you are saying that PDX let an outsider who has no interest in South America and does not speak (much) Spanish handle the rework of South America in the DLC that focussed on the major colonisers Spain and Portugal? And now the same person is saying: "There is no need for a rework."
Mind blown.
(P.S. Did you even look at the link I provided above? Because at least one of the guys posting is a South-American Historian and might disagree with your take.)

I said CENTRAL America (though Mesoamerica would be more accurate). Not South.

I never was asked to rework South America, and as I already stated - I don't feel I'm capable of doing it.
 
  • 5
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
You're welcome.

For completeness's sake, I suppose I should add that the region I worked on in GC did include bits of South America (the Spanish Main coast in Venezuela/Colombia) to include additional provinces, but that I was not asked to work on more of the region than that. And the work I had to do on even that little bit of South America is by far the biggest reason I know I'm the wrong person to overhaul the rest of the region.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
This looks awesome! A more detailed NA has been on my EU4 wishlist for a while, especially in the great lakes area (I grew up in traditional Huron-Wendat territory and spent a lot of time growing up around a Huron-Wendat historical site.) Also exciting for me was that the Algonquin, whos lands I live on now, will also be playable! There's a lot of love in this update and I'm super excited.

The new way confederations work seems way better than the old way, but I do have one question. If I play as a member of the Iroquois confederacy, for example, is the intention that I play the whole game to 1820 with my motley crew of nations in a confederation or will I eventually be able to unify into a single political entity? Do ahistorical confederacies that I form myself work the same way? Basically I guess I want to know whether tags like Iroquois and Huron are gone for good and when I'll now have to expand as one of the member nations instead and make like, an Onondega Empire or whatever. Apologies in advance if this was already answered in a dev diary or in this thread and I just missed it!
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Tag density for Colonial Nations is also incredibly low. The real stinger is the stated of interest from the devs in game about the age where South America was fundamentally the most important continent on every concievable matter compared to Central and North America.
Can we remember that Mesoamerica is way smaller than South America and despite that was far more densely populated. Same could be said about New Spain, since 1670s turned to be the spanish colony that produced the most, concurring with the decline of Potosí mining.

Considering the size of South America you could add both Mesoamerica and the Caribbean to North America and the picture is different.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Can we remember that Mesoamerica is way smaller than South America and despite that was far more densely populated. Same could be said about New Spain, since 1670s turned to be the spanish colony that produced the most, concurring with the decline of Potosí mining.

Considering the size of South America you could add both Mesoamerica and the Caribbean to North America and the picture is different.

I usually consider Mexico a part of North America, to be frank, but i should have made it clearer that i was referring to it in that line, but the areas focused in ''Golden Century'', Mesoamerica in that was not changed very much, nor got the flavour it needed and still does. Regardless, as of now, several factors, such as province density and the ''tropical'' malus, which makes warm climates inherently inferior to any temperate ones, and the way trade flow works makes the USA simply superior to Mesoamerica and New Spain in every way. In addition, Mesoamerica was arguably one of the most densily populated regions in the world in terms urban centres, and yet it's development and terrain are not quite up to par in game. Its not as bad a state as South America, but is still sidelined in favour of natives that had far less political, economical and historical power and influence, in an extremely consistent fashion. And lets just say the portayal of native religion, especially ''Nahuatl'' is both ahistorical to the point of being pejorative, and quite unfun to play. And speaking of pejorative, the Purepecha people are still called ''Tarascan'', a term that doesnt exactly have nice connotations. Much on the contrary.

Just because Mesoamerica was just as wealthy, if not more, in history, than South America, doesnt mean its not in a similar boat in terms of being a child left behind in the game. In fact, the Animist religion still exists in the region. There is much that could (and imo should) be done.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
True, the development in Meso/South America is below what it should be in 1444 (the same goes for the more developped parts of North America, eg the Mississippians).

The problem is, if we make the development realistic for 1444, then we need effectively unavoidable events that wipe out most of that development right back to low levels once the Columbian Exchange takes place and our friends smallpox, measles and the rest start spreading. Frustrating for anyone trying to play the region knowing that they're wasting their time and any effort they make to actually develop will be negated less than a century into the game.

Speaking personally, it feels like poor gameplay and poor use of research resources. At the end of the day, EU IV is a game, and that means some compromises need to be made.

Tarascan Empire remain the common name of that state in English. Which is the standard naming practice for such things. It probalby shouldn't be the common name, but it is what it is. Note that the culture (that is to say, the people) is called Purepecha in the game.
 
Last edited:
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions: