Yeah, actualy some polish magnates, were more wealthy than french king. (and had their private armies)
Europa Universalis IV Developer Diary 10 - It all belongs to Mother Russia...
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
-
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.
Yeah, actualy some polish magnates, were more wealthy than french king. (and had their private armies)
It still seems to me that you're saying that Poland has no way to win - strictly speaking of military and not including the player factor. The winged hussar was a unit which was supposed to even the odds against Russia. If they can't fulfill that role then how has Poland any chance?
Speaking of Poland, will there be a PLC tag in the game?
Judging from screenshot in this DD it looks like Poland, though hard to be 100% sure. It would be a shame since Spain or Great Britain are in - no reason for PLC not be in. On the other hand, if that was the case then paradox would make PLC tag in EU3/expansions...
They are not "extra" NIs.
You get the same number of NIs with all nations, it's just that some countries get different ones, which in the case of the tiered nations are meant to reflect the path that nation took. In the case of non-tiered nations, they'll reflect the general progress of nations in their category (whether that's Western/Catholic, Western/Orthodox, Eastern/Catholic, Eastern/Orthodox, Eastern/Muslim etc.).
I know they are not extras like additional one over the other ones. I meant they give extra benefits to the country, which the other countries will unlikely be able to counter with the standard NIs.
Well, we don't know that yet. The generic NI's may have similar level of bonus associated as the 'special' ones. That would, in general, result in parity between generic and tier 1 countries. However I am bit afraid that some countries with specific NI may become specialized enough (stacking bonuses in one area - like e.g. Russia in military) that generic country with a wide spread mix of ideas (my assumption here) may be unable to compete in this specific domain.
Source?
While my knowledge of Polish history is limited to Adam Zamoyski's Poland, I really doubt they were more wealthy than the French King.
Considering that the French king was struggling with the English and his country was falling apart and he barely could keep it together, while in Central-Europe the power of the nobles was on its zenith, I think it's possible.
1) If they are the same for everyone then there is no point in having them. Different but reasonably balanced national/racial bonuses are a pretty common theme in 4x games. While EU isn't strictly a 4x game it does share many characteristics with them.
2) All nations will have a set of national ideas, not all will have a unique set of national ideas (i.e some nations will share NI sets with other similar nations). In fact, Johan said in this DD that all Russian states have the same set of NIs (except maybe Novgorod). You don't have to be Muscovy, France, England, etc to get a set of NIs
So, if you know so much about the NIs, what are the "standard" ones? Why are they weaker than the featured (tier 1/2/3) countries? What we have so far suggests that they will just be different for the featured, rather than unfeatured countries.
We may even get a situation where (for example) Brandenburg/Prussia gets 5 out of 7 NI shared with the other North German HRE countries, with two late period uniques. These may be better in specific areas than the generic ones, but weaker in every other aspect. The 5 of 7 may be in a slightly different order. E.G. 1,2,3,4,5 versus 1,3,2,4,5.
Source?
While my knowledge of Polish history is limited to Adam Zamoyski's Poland, I really doubt they were more wealthy than the French King.
Radziwiłs for example were one of the biggest lithuanian magnate familia, and they held much of lithuanian lands. Same for rus nobles, they pretty much owned so much land that they were mostly those who defended poland against forgein enemies, and solved the internal problems - even sometimes doing it against King(like during khmelnytsky uprising, he did have support of the king - but he fought agains one of the grand noble family, and in the end he was seen as rebel - because he brough outside help).
Oh, that all looks so great to me. Though there are certainly some devs I should read now that i discovered the whole EU-IV-development-started-months-ago-fact
Just, tell you as a Russian, there is a typo that will be a shame if sticks through in the game:
Its not suBeDnik - it's suDeBnik, trust me)) means a book of laws
Just, tell you as a Russian, there is a typo that will be a shame if sticks through in the game:
Its not suBeDnik - it's suDeBnik, trust me)) means a book of laws
This has been reported at least couple times, and Johan (or some other developer) said that the actual error was only in the DD.
I wonder if there will be pros and cons regarding the pursuit of an empire vs. a nation; the conflict between the russkiy and rossiyskiy cultures and identities.
Hey, Paradox awesome dudes.
Your games are awesome.
Only one question, though: y u h8 rasha? Srsly, guise. Why you invent non-existant province names like "Mordvar" or "Idnakar"? Why complete randomness province-wise in Siberia? The first half-decent map of European Russia only appeared in DW. CKII isn't too accurate, as well. No other country is as messed up on the map in any of your games. What's the matter, Swedes? Old rivalry much? Anyways, you guys are cool, and there's no doubt you'd make an even awesomer game outta EU4. But give Russia some love, for a change.
In the light of the aforementioned facts, allow me to present you a [quickly made and not very aesthetically pleasing bluprint of a] detailed and historically accurate province map of Russia (1444 starting point) that is relevant to the games' timescale. Prolly too detailed to be fully implemented, but it may be useful for future modding. The map is only about provinces and their relative size and position, *not* about borders, which could be adjusted and fine-tuned the way you deem useful, so ignore the blobness.
edit: hmm, im new to this forum, and apparently the pics on here are automatically scaled to fit the post space. can't figure how to get them properly adjusted yet.
Okay, for now, I'll just post them links, then.
European Russia
Western Siberia
Eastern Siberia
Your games are awesome.
Only one question, though: y u h8 rasha? Srsly, guise. Why you invent non-existant province names like "Mordvar" or "Idnakar"? Why complete randomness province-wise in Siberia? The first half-decent map of European Russia only appeared in DW. CKII isn't too accurate, as well. No other country is as messed up on the map in any of your games. What's the matter, Swedes? Old rivalry much?
Anyways, you guys are cool, and there's no doubt you'd make an even awesomer game outta EU4. But give Russia some love, for a change.In the light of the aforementioned facts, allow me to present you a [quickly made and not very aesthetically pleasing bluprint of a] detailed and historically accurate province map of Russia (1444 starting point) that is relevant to the games' timescale. Prolly too detailed to be fully implemented, but it may be useful for future modding. The map is only about provinces and their relative size and position, *not* about borders, which could be adjusted and fine-tuned the way you deem useful, so ignore the blobness.
edit: hmm, im new to this forum, and apparently the pics on here are automatically scaled to fit the post space. can't figure how to get them properly adjusted yet.
Okay, for now, I'll just post them links, then.
European Russia
Western Siberia
Eastern Siberia
Last edited:
So looking forward to this! I figure on my Russia game I'll try to form Russia with the Kievans if possible.