EU4 - Development Diary 2nd of April 2015

[PhroX]

Adding new peacetime mechanics and depth is really, really great news, but this bit worries me slightly:

"If there is no current debate, nor any active benefits of an issue, you will slowly lose legitimacy & republican tradition."

Considering how the goal of the monarch should be to not have to rely on parliament for support and to rule of his own accord, it seems counter-intuitive to punish the player for being able to act in that way, at least with legitimacy which is something very valuable and hard to replace. Then again, if this is only something that comes up every ten years then that's a very reasonable timeframe in which to operate. But if this kind of system is ever to be extended to the rest of European monarchies, one should remember that Louis XIV didn't lose legitimacy for not calling upon the estates-general.

Basically, I think that instead of punishing the player for not using parliament with legitimacy decreases, it should just be harder to get support from them the longer it's been since the last time you asked. Use parliament often and accept their demands frequently and those demands will stay small, but go a long period without making any concessions or consulting them and when they finally get the chance they'll push you for every last concession they can get.

I say this because it seems like what this game mechanic is representing is extraordinary demands by the monarch from parliament, which was not something that parliamentarians wanted to deal with. The English ideal was always for the king to live off of his own incomes and not have to come to them asking for more. Not asking for extraordinary taxes (i.e. not using this mechanic) would increase legitimacy, if anything.

However it goes, I'm very happy to see Paradox focusing on depth, and I'll buy this expansion for sure, whatever it is.

Nice post.

I'd also like to see the possibility of a Parlimentary Monarchy drifting into an Absolute one should Parliament not be consulted regularly (or indeed, the wishes of parliament ignored). Obviously, Parliamentarian forces would object to such a transition - with the outcome depending on the strength of Parliament relative to the King. A strong king - especially a series of strong kings - should have a good chance of pushing through a transition to absolutism with only relatively minor opposition. A weak king trying to do so...well, looks like we've got us a civil war.

Conversely, it'd be interesting to see the reverse happening - nobles and other with power in an Absolute or Despotic Monacrhy forcing a weak king to establish a parliament.

 

[Johan]

Constitutional monarchy OTOH is +1 legitimacy, -5 years of nationalism, +10% manpower recovery and -0.15 monthly autonomy. Mechanically superior in most circumstances, but English monarchy may have special events/decisions/debates that make it better. (And it's available from the start rather than tech 22.)

Const Monarchy is better, but its far later than english monarchy

 

[Johan]

Will Dutch/Merchant Republics get this mechanic?

no

 

[Johan]

Will each seat have multiple aims? Cos from that UI it looks like if I want Yorkshire's vote, I have to lose legitimacy, or lose military tradition for Lancashire. This seems really simplistic as any debate would cost, say, x gold, y prestige and z legitimacy all the time, so you'd always have insane boosters on.

each seat has one aim only for that debate.

 

[Elmokki]

I wish all these new governments (elective monarchy, dutch republic and english monarchy) were more general (as in replace Orangists with <dynastyname>ists) and available to all countries somehow outside nation designer. I mean, it wouldn't be entirely unfeasible to imagine governments in the style of those somewhere.

 

[Johan]

ETA? For campaign planning purposes?

Like a quarter/half year or closer?

When its ready!

We usually aim to get out about 3 major updates each year though, but how long each takes to do depends on various amount of factors.

 

[ChildeR]

All our future expansions will be in 15-20 range.

No small expansions?

I've liked Res Publica and Legacy of Rome the most of all CK2&EU4 expansions.

 

[Johan]

No small expansions?

I've liked Res Publica and Legacy of Rome the most of all CK2&EU4 expansions.

They just don't sell as well, and also tends to become more costly with all QA and overhead needed.

 

[ChildeR]

They just don't sell as well, and also tends to become more costly with all QA and overhead needed.

Too bad, but understandable I guess.

 

[anzac1915]

Would it make sense for the English Monarchy to be in the English Civil War event chain? Depending on which option you choose (English Monarchy/No English Monarchy, something like that)?

 

[RaptorCommander]

Loving these extra mechanics but I am concerned that they will make warfare less valuable. Why is that bad you ask? Well it is one of two things that players actively compete on with each other. (trade is the other one)

These new mechanics for peace must lead to active interaction and dynamic between players/AI or else it goes into boring feast

IDEA:
- To balance peace time and war time activities the peace time activities should stop(be easier to pass, national unity) while at war but only when war exhaustion is less than 10.

 

[Buladelu]

Funny how this works. We had New World expansion, then Republic expansion, then War expansion... Now we get New World expansion and Republic expansion again.

True, free features expand other areas but it seems when Paradox wants to sell the game it's about New World, Republics and War.

 

[Johan]

Funny how this works. We had New World expansion, then Republic expansion, then War expansion... Now we get New World expansion and Republic expansion again.

We had Colonisation, trade, government, war, exploration and the next one is X.

 

[Buladelu]

We had Colonisation, trade, government, war, exploration and the next one is X.

Oh, true. You are much better at selling EU4 than I am!

Anyway, let's start hyping about X. "Development"? Or should I say... "Exploitation"?

 

[Witto]

Interesting.
I like the fact that the game is becoming more and more complex.

 

[Ephafn]

Are all the convincing of parliament seats be about taking country-wide penalties, or is there going to be some that are tied to doing something specific to the province? I mean something somewhat similar to the current missions:
- Build X in my province
- Increase base tax in my province
- Convert culture in my province
- etc...

 

[VineFynn]

I think I can see the rationale behind losing legitimacy by not consulting Parliament. Given that this feature is constricted to Constitutional Monarchies and Constitutional Republics, not at least consulting Parliament can be seen as dictatorial and reduce the mandate of the government in the eyes of the electorate and the general populace.

 

[Sunspawn]

I hope that with the new government-related features, we'll have also negatives for some - such as annexation/annexation speed for feudal monarchies (stealthBBBnerf).

 

[EldarPanic]

"Next week, we'll focus on why we build walls."You build them for protection against WAR

 

[Slargos]

Downvoted. All this rabid focus on singleplayer is taking away from the true multiplayer experience.