How to make peacetime enjoyable?

[Maq]

There's little doubt that war will always be the most thrilling part of any strategy game. If we ask why, two aspects should be pointed out: First, during war is everything at stake, you can lose the whole campaign. Second, war is fast.
Peacetime, on the other hand, will always be running on much slower pace. That's the nature of war and peace. Some contributors to this forums complain that peace is just boring and care for nothing but quick conquest. I believe they represent a minority among EUIV users, because they can be served better by various other games, while EUIV is special precisely because of its complexity. Put it simply, you must endure some period of preparations before you're ready for successful conquest.
Many contributors provided suggestions how the peacetime could become more entertaining, even a bit exciting. Paradox has recently made a move towards this direction with Common Sense. Yet I have already noticed complaints that so called "development" is nothing more than quite boring spending monarch powers for rather artificial improvements of provinces the player already has.
But frankly, inventing something truly enjoyable for peacetime is far from easy. And right now I'm trying to do something like that for my mod.
This makes me to invite the community to discuss suggestions targeting this problem. You are invited to add your ideas, no matter whether they are moddable or require reworking the whole game. For modding problems, we have special subforum.
I would love to read suggestions like that: I would enjoy peacetime if I could be busy with ...
Thank you for reading this, and even more for your suggestions and opinions.

EDIT [Jul.29]:
I have made a short summary of some promising suggestions already presented and discussed:
Celtic Emporer suggested random events like desease which require some effort to handle them.
ShadowCammy suggested ruler-subject interactions aimed at lowering public unrest, like public appearances, festivities, etc.
Another interesting suggestion from ShadowCammy opened discussion about assassination plotting as a diplomatic action.
Grand Historian contributed the idea of making rulers more alive, meaning featuring more traits, and stuff.
Tommytoofar suggested developing management on provincial level, featuring provincial governors/barons, and also population growth/decline depending on management and events.
t6.28 presented what he/she called a more complex espionage system, but which seems to me rather like some additional diplomatic possibilities. Later suggested using faction system for all countries.
BrokenSky voted for removing stability button and added suggestions how to manage stability instead. Also suggested what he/she called 'political ambitions'. Another suggestion: missionaries spreading faith abroad, even secretly.
TheMeInTeam commented negatively development introduced by Common Sense, as it does not require making important choices.
luxfelix contributed an idea of travelling luminaries, a way to support active exchange of knowledge, influence, etc.
Voldurak78 expressed wish to introduce family trees and further develop subversive diplomatic actions.
luxfelix in an interesting way developed triggers to make a country more or less focused on military.
Buladelu presented an opinion that peacetime should be expanded by interaction with other countries, not internal politics.
Philadelphus contributed an idea of 'peace-time' units, like envoys, able to influence trade or diplomatic relations.

 

[BrokenSky]

@magnusvejby , @BrokenSky
I personally routinely employ policies, and often non-military ones. I think it depends on one's playstyle. I don't play to be a blobbing monster at all cost, so I can spend MP for policies. You are perhaps more aggressive, that's the difference.
Generally, the isea of getting one advantage together with another disadvantage is essential. The principle of CHOICE, that's that. In that I agree absolutely. But what about poor AI? Will it be able to choose wisely?
From modder's point of view, I can't see a way to help AI to choose policies in reasonable way. And I don't give much chance Paradox will improve AI behaviour significantly within EUIV frame.

I tend to use policies when I don't have any idea groups open and am not behind in tech and don't particularly want to use the points for anything (e.g. development), and for a few very specific policies where the benefit is worth the cost (e.g. +20 settlers per year from exploration + expansion is so useful for early game colonization that I will usually use it).

Most policies are just not worth it in my opinion though.

Wrt Ai, that would be where this idea breaks down a little. Perhaps if the AI were made to prioritize certain bonuses and do cost benefit based on that whenever its priorities changed?

France, for example might prioritize land moral bonuses, but have a low priority on religious conversion as long as religious unity were above 100% or there were no provinces which could be converted or were in the process of being converted. It could be based on the leader's personalty? (Militarist, colonizer etc.) plus or minus some things due to existing modifiers, so a country with higher than average moral would priorities more moral bonuses highly, but a colonizer would prioritize it less, and a country would prioritize bonuses to colonists based on the square(?) of the number of active colonies.

 

[magnusvejby]

It could be based on the leader's personalty? (Militarist, colonizer etc.) plus or minus some things due to existing modifiers, so a country with higher than average moral would priorities more moral bonuses highly, but a colonizer would prioritize it less, and a country would prioritize bonuses to colonists based on the square(?) of the number of active colonies.

I think this is an excellent idea, and by tying ruler personalty together with what policies the AI takes could work really well, and would most certainly make ruler personalty to something more than how much land that nation want's.

 

[Maq]

I tend to use policies when I don't have any idea groups open and am not behind in tech and don't particularly want to use the points for anything (e.g. development), and for a few very specific policies where the benefit is worth the cost (e.g. +20 settlers per year from exploration + expansion is so useful for early game colonization that I will usually use it).

Most policies are just not worth it in my opinion though.

Wrt Ai, that would be where this idea breaks down a little. Perhaps if the AI were made to prioritize certain bonuses and do cost benefit based on that whenever its priorities changed?

France, for example might prioritize land moral bonuses, but have a low priority on religious conversion as long as religious unity were above 100% or there were no provinces which could be converted or were in the process of being converted. It could be based on the leader's personalty? (Militarist, colonizer etc.) plus or minus some things due to existing modifiers, so a country with higher than average moral would priorities more moral bonuses highly, but a colonizer would prioritize it less, and a country would prioritize bonuses to colonists based on the square(?) of the number of active colonies.

Your suggestions could be made real in mods as long as we don't use policies, but event- or scripted modifiers instead - which is the same in effect but looking different on screen.
You know, I consider even national ideas too static and rigid. Once chosen, they steer country's direction for centuries. I'm working on a more dynamic scheme, so that bonuses (always tied with maluses in other field!) are gained or lost depending on what the country currently considers its priority. In such a scheme, triggers of the kind you suggested can be implemented. My dream - yes, a dream - is to make AI rather smarter this way, and to opt for military bonuses if in danger, for trade ones if feeling safe but lacking funds,... and so on. I think I'll spend a lot of time balancing these triggers and modifiers... but it's a great fun, indeed.

 

[Maq]

I think this is an excellent idea, and by tying ruler personalty together with what policies the AI takes could work really well, and would most certainly make ruler personalty to something more than how much land that nation want's.

Oh yes, choosing personalities is moddable, and making personalities trigger various modifiers as well. I'm working on making specific casus bellis depend on personality, too.
In vanilla, personalities are rather railroading. Russia, Manchu, Ottomans are made to prefer militarist, Ming, Byzantioum, Pope are designed not to like it. But in general, it's quite random. Some experienced modders assured me that the impact of personality on AI behaviour is only small. But we can make choosing personality make more sense, and afterwards country's behaviour more depending on the chosen one.

 

[Canute VII]

Well, I agree, paying out MP constantly for a policy doesn't really make a lot of sense. I also see what pdx tried to achieve (meaningful decisions), but I guess it doesnt really work out. Your example underlines that; that particular one about the weights could rather be a decision, but I think, it is probably somehow already implicitely covered in technology.

How about paying for policies with

• Monthly amount of Ducats, the amount of which scales with total effective development (eg counted for in "state maintenace") and
• an initial hit to corruption, say +5%? and
• an initial hit to legitimacy/hord unity/... (although not to republican tradition, since policies should be the centrepiece of a republican system) - say also -5%?

I believe now with corruption and that ducats are a more rare ressource in the game the policy mechanic could get a rework, so that people would actually make more use of it, right?

Amendmend: Open policies to everybody, i.e. do not make them neccessarily dependent on combinations of specific ideas, but have

1. idea-backed policies - these will cost ducats+corruption+legitimacy (as proposed above) and
2. policies unbacked by ideas - these will cost ducats+corruption+legitimacy + monarch points

Policies then could become available once the first nation in your tech group has unlocked both the underlying ideas (this could be yourself of course). So for example I am Austria and Prussia has unlocked quality and innovative idea groups (whereas I have done some other...). Prussia could pursue the policy giving "+20% infantry combat ability" and would have to invest ducats+corruption+legitimacy. Me, Austria, then could also implement this policy, but in addition to ducats+corruption+legitimacy it would cost me 1 Mil MP upkeep per month, effectively denying my level 1 advisor (if I have only this one). So having the right set of ideas would still be usefull, but it wouldn't be as restrictive as is now and open much more opportunity to a wider range of countries. PDX could even add a timer to when I, Austria could implement that policy, given that without the right idea set I must first learn of it's existence - say 10 years after it becomes available to the first country in my tech group, I would also be able to implement it. It would also make being in the "right" tech group, i.e. the one with lots of countries with lots of finished idea groups and therefore lots of available policies, more attractive (currently this would probably always be western, though).

 

[Arizal]

I proposed sometimes ago to make (nationalist and religious) rebels matter more by opening diplomatic channels with them, allowing you to have multi-dimensional interest groups rather than boring, unidimensional, rebels. While not strictly speaking a "peace time mechanic", it would make rebel management more interesting and intricate with other things you are doing, further incentiving the player to expand in one direction instead of another (in order to please interest groups or to marginalize them).

By the way, about rebels, does anybody have an idea why the number shown before their revolt is in percentage while it could very well be a number from 0 to 10, since it always grows by adding 10 to the previous number?

More to the point, I believe peace time mechanics are very trickly to add in a game like EUIV, because ideally they shouldn't be too insignificant as to be negilgible, yet they shouldn't overrun the player when he has other things to do (while at war). One way I can think of that could help making our countries more lively is inspired from Stellaris' situation log. I never saw it in action, but I suppose giving to the player some issues he could solve when he wish to do so and which would give him bonuses could be a good idea. Those "missions" would be on hold while at war. They could be linked to Parliement and Estates.

 

[Cthetheslayer]

Perhaps you can do deals like swapping provinces, or offer to buy a province from someone, obviously the AI would be very disinclined to sell one, perhaps the things that would make them want to sell it are the following: Autonomy higher than 50%= +10 reason, 75% = 15 reason, 100% = 20 reason, No core = +20 reason, Territorial core = +10, wrong culture = +20, same culture group = +10 reason, heathen is either +5 or -5, stacking for each level of tolerance either positive or negative, heretic is either +3 or -3, stacking for each level of tolerance. Obviously there would be massive negative reasons so you couldn't just buy the world as venice. Also perhaps more treaties, like a tributary, or the ability to send a diplomat to offer a country an heir from your dynasty, again there would obviously be massive negatives, the +'s would be: Same religion= +10, same group = +5, same culture =+10, culture group = +5, historical friend = +50.
If you have any thoughts on any of this, just say so.

 

[Philadelphus]

By the way, about rebels, does anybody have an idea why the number shown before their revolt is in percentage while it could very well be a number from 0 to 10, since it always grows by adding 10 to the previous number?

I'm guessing it has to do with the transition from the old rebel system, where that number was simply the actual chance those rebels would spawn each month. Paradox changed it to the new, better, system, but apparently didn't want to change everything all at once. Or something. I agree it doesn't really make sense as is, and could totally be a simply 0–10 scale.

 

[luxfelix]

I proposed sometimes ago to make (nationalist and religious) rebels matter more by opening diplomatic channels with them, allowing you to have multi-dimensional interest groups rather than boring, unidimensional, rebels. While not strictly speaking a "peace time mechanic", it would make rebel management more interesting and intricate with other things you are doing, further incentiving the player to expand in one direction instead of another (in order to please interest groups or to marginalize them).

By the way, about rebels, does anybody have an idea why the number shown before their revolt is in percentage while it could very well be a number from 0 to 10, since it always grows by adding 10 to the previous number?

More to the point, I believe peace time mechanics are very trickly to add in a game like EUIV, because ideally they shouldn't be too insignificant as to be negilgible, yet they shouldn't overrun the player when he has other things to do (while at war). One way I can think of that could help making our countries more lively is inspired from Stellaris' situation log. I never saw it in action, but I suppose giving to the player some issues he could solve when he wish to do so and which would give him bonuses could be a good idea. Those "missions" would be on hold while at war. They could be linked to Parliement and Estates.

Ooh! I could also see this as a way to support governments in exile (Jacobin, exiled Bourbons, etc.).

 

[Naga Niome]

The only Paradox game I felt that had decent and intriguing "peacetime" mechanics was Victoria and bit Crusader Kings. Otherwise what Crusader Kings needs is characters to actually travel to provinces instead of teleporting, and as much as an actual dynasty system would benefit Europa Universalis 4, it isn't really an actual "peacetime" feature,

The only reasonable peacetime mechanic I could see being implemented into Europa without needing to benefit the military focus of the game, and to not even have anything to do with it - which is what we want, right? Is one that expands the provincial management of cultures, similar to what essentially Victoria has, and what EU3 emulated by having some sort of population counting that didn't mean anything.

If provincial culture could be represented by some sort of system that involves growth, decline, migration and emigration, and some sort of "center-periphery model" that involves the the dissemination of technology bonuses through the "center", being the provincial capital such as Constantinople, and the rest of the provinces rural/urbanry, being the periphery that can represent moreso minority rebels or, even the larger population somehow existing from the provincial capital. While questionable "topics" may come up, especially during this time period to, the sudden disappearance of populations can be represented by simple mathematical increases and deductions. The seizure of Constantinople can be represented with a gross loss of Greeks through enslavement, desperate departure by ship, and death, essentially remaining Greek still for next 2-3 hundred years, till only the outskirts are visibly Greek and the center is Turkic.

Populations could be affected by Education, Prestige, Corruption, Autonomy, Idea Groups, Tolerance, etc. Your Primary Culture will be affected much more by your loss of Prestige than say, the minorities within your empire that'll usually concern themselves over your Religious Tolerance and Autonomy.

So when the refugees from Constantinople happen, throughout Europe as a whole, they'll receive miniscule Greek amounts of 0.05 to 1.00 within their pie-shares of the capitol provinces, that in turn produce the "Byzantine Refugee" event. Those Greek-shares have incredible educational attributes.

This could even be tied into the technology system as I mentioned, and along with perhaps another feature that can be considered "Renaissance". The Renaissance feature has its mathematics too. The higher it is, the more absorption your Primary Culture receives in producing the Renaissance era of its own and receiving the influence from neighboring countries/cultures. Progressively, Peter the Great can be responsible for a dramatic increase in Russia's Renaissance meter, along with the Educational level of many center-Russian's.

 

[victimizer]

The economy could be deepened. I came up with an idea while playing tall/colonization game with France. It was pretty a meh game, but made me think of the economy and how it could be improved.

The idea I came up with is a mercantilism and monetary policy system. Basically, instead of having just ducats, you'd basically have currencies and bullion: or gold and coinages.

Every country could have its own coin. Every province would have money demand, which if unmet, would reduce the province tax income, while exceeding this money demand would create inflation.

Your currency would derive value from its fineness and the amount of provinces imposing tax liabilities demoninated in your currency (e.g. fiduriacy vs content value).

Thus, for a country it would be important to have its currency used as broadly as possible, and have as many fully monetized provinces, but the contradictory demand of fineness would complicate this. In order to fully benefit from trade income, you'd also need a fine coin with as much gold content as possible. Thus you would have to acquire bullion and keep your coin fine: debasing your currency through rampant minting would mean losing ground among merchants, who would stop using your coin in favor of other, finer ones. This means having to balance between fully monetized provinces and maximum trade income.

This would make bullion a valuable resource, and it would be acquired by two primary means. 1. owning gold mines or gold producing colonies. 2. mercantilism.

Mercantilism would become a deeper system representing various bullionist policies: i.e. policies meant to bring in and retain as much bullion as possible.

Mercantilist policies would revolve around promoting exports. Lowering wages for your peasants would increase your bullion income while provoking unrest. Dedicating high-value goods producing provinces, like silk provinces, to exporting exlusively, would dedicate the province's production income to bringing in gold from abroad. Such exports would probably also need extensive subsidies, which would hurt your economy in general just so you can bring in bullion.

Tariffs could be properly implemented to promote the consumption of domestic goods. The efects could disastrious though. If you lack for example, naval supplies, and you impose heavy tariffs, your naval construiction costs would skyrocket.

 

[BrokenSky]

The only Paradox game I felt that had decent and intriguing "peacetime" mechanics was Victoria and bit Crusader Kings. Otherwise what Crusader Kings needs is characters to actually travel to provinces instead of teleporting, and as much as an actual dynasty system would benefit Europa Universalis 4, it isn't really an actual "peacetime" feature,

The main reason people call dynasty mechanics a "peacetime feature" is that it would make things like PUs way easier to predict and manage and would turn what is essentially a game of chance based on chance based on chance into a game of strategy based on planning based on chance.

But yeah this point aside I think your suggestion sounds good?

 

[GMOEU]

I make minor mods.

I've tried to make peace-time more hands-on by introducing an assassination event and decision,
and having an ongoing event where you have to maintain a certain quality (e.g. Stability) at a certain level (e,g. stability = 2) over a time period (e.g. 10 years) to get a small bonus but if you don't maintain it (e.g. stability = 2) during the time period the people of your country get upset and there is a bad effect. So you must keep this in mind during peacetime rather than always going fast-forward.

I also have small bonuses for being a leader in a trade node, having a higher development and being a leader in a trade good.
There are also negative consequences for low development.
So peacetime becomes more important.