I can't handle the institution mechanic anymore

[Nostalgium]

Don't forget dai viet getting - 10% artillery cost for knowing westerners but no one else gets this bonus

I'm more amenable to this kind of bonus TBH. Kinda like how a lot of countries bought muskets of Europeans, but Japan not only bought them, but reverse-engineered them and started making them to such an extent that during Oda Nobunaga's time, Japan was the single biggest producer of muskets, and owned a higher share of the world's muskets than any other nation on the planet. This should (and AFAIK, is) represented as bonuses in a number of Japanese idea sets and missions, and rightly so, while not applying to, say, Ming, even though Ming also engaged with Europeans.

 

[AvengedK1ng]

I'm more amenable to this kind of bonus TBH. Kinda like how a lot of countries bought muskets of Europeans, but Japan not only bought them, but reverse-engineered them and started making them to such an extent that during Oda Nobunaga's time, Japan was the single biggest producer of muskets, and owned a higher share of the world's muskets than any other nation on the planet. This should (and AFAIK, is) represented as bonuses in a number of Japanese idea sets and missions, and rightly so, while not applying to, say, Ming, even though Ming also engaged with Europeans.

Thats Japan that would go on to not only reunify but come a damn good chance of conquering Korea, meanwhile dai viet expands not that much and is invaded by qing on a fools expedition.

Indians being able to largely modernise/just employ European mercs/get European military advisors can be shown in their tech not being that far behind rather than some mil buffs. Whereas Spain's extra cannon pip is useful to show how in peer to peer fighting it was a military hegemon for 100 odd years

 

[EarlKonrad]

I too dislike institutions, but not because of there not being a gap between Europe and ROTW in regards of tech (or said gap being somewhat small) but because it just serves the purpose of being a Monarch Power drain on countries.

Instead, I'd much prefer if institutions unlocked gameplay mechanics (i.e embracing Global Trade gives the nation access to Trade Company mechanics) and had nothing to do with Technology. So what we do with Technology then? Give each tech group their own tech tree of sorts and bring back Westernization in some form for the late game without having the dichotomy of you either Westernize or you lose to Europeans. Have it be a choice between switching out of your group/getting access to advanced units or stay within the confines of your tech group.

I don't see how you can satisfy any of the camps while still having Institutions tied to tech as some people will always complain that it is either too easy for the AI to get access to Institutions, thus rendering the whole system somewhat moot, or that it is too hard thus giving too big of an advantage to the Europeans.

 

[nobodyinparticular]

My question to people complaining about institution/tech differences between Europe and ROTW... are you really unable as a colonizer to steamroll your way through the Americas, Africa and Asia? It really isn't that hard.

 

[Nostalgium]

Instead, I'd much prefer if institutions unlocked gameplay mechanics (i.e embracing Global Trade gives the nation access to Trade Company mechanics) and had nothing to do with Technology. So what we do with Technology then? Give each tech group their own tech tree of sorts and bring back Westernization in some form for the late game without having the dichotomy of you either Westernize or you lose to Europeans.

Now here is a take I really, really like. As for tech trees, I like this too. They could look to I:R for inspiration here - that tech tree functions like a double-purpose for idea sets too, and your tech path is damn well near more important than the nation you chose, and has significant implications for how you play.

 

[Mukaparska]

My question to people complaining about institution/tech differences between Europe and ROTW... are you really unable as a colonizer to steamroll your way through the Americas, Africa and Asia? It really isn't that hard.

That's irrelevant. The point is that there is tech parity. Waging a war against Mali doesn't feel like a subjugation of an underdeveloped African state by a European colonizer, it feels like a war just like in Europe against another developed state, that just happens to have worse units.

In the old versions of the game, Mali would be technologically inferior and you could make it a protectorate. I'm not sure do I remember correctly, but wasn't there also a very generous Casus Belli against technologically inferior states? Like the Imperialism Casus Belli being tied to tech levels? I dunno... The point is that the dynamic feel of the older versions where states evolved at a different pace is gone (creating the framework for European dominance), replaced by a homogeneous, hyperconnected world where institutions spread as if internet existed in the 1700's... Even a remote tribe in the heart of Sub-Saharan Africa is just a little bit technologically behind compared to Europe, while lightyears ahead of any American tribes. And when Europeans (or Chinese, or any ROTW state because they're all equally advanced) finally arrives in America, it takes less than a lifetime for the locals to embrace modern technology until they're almost equal with the colonizers.

 

[jamal bakr]

My question to people complaining about institution/tech differences between Europe and ROTW... are you really unable as a colonizer to steamroll your way through the Americas, Africa and Asia? It really isn't that hard.

Eh, whoever comes out on top between Vijay and Bahamis are pretty tough till around 1530. Ming can be tough as well if you attack them with high mandate/before they implode

That's irrelevant. The point is that there is tech parity. Waging a war against Mali doesn't feel like a subjugation of an underdeveloped African state by a European colonizer, it feels like a war just like in Europe against another developed state, that just happens to have worse units.

In the old versions of the game, Mali would be technologically inferior and you could make it a protectorate. I'm not sure do I remember correctly, but wasn't there also a very generous Casus Belli against technologically inferior states? Like the Imperialism Casus Belli being tied to tech levels? I dunno... The point is that the dynamic feel of the older versions where states evolved at a different pace is gone (creating the framework for European dominance), replaced by a homogeneous, hyperconnected world where institutions spread as if internet existed in the 1700's... Even a remote tribe in the heart of Sub-Saharan Africa is just a little bit technologically behind compared to Europe, while lightyears ahead of any American tribes. And when Europeans (or Chinese, or any ROTW state because they're all equally advanced) finally arrives in America, it takes less than a lifetime for the locals to embrace modern technology until they're almost equal with the colonizers.

Whether or not Mali is a rough customer depends a LOT on when you hit him. Before 1500 they start without feudalism and at tech 2; They also get hit with a series of nasty disasters. You can run them over very easily. They catch up due to gold income/institution leaking from being muslim.

 

[Lykus Cerebros]

Whether or not Mali is a rough customer depends a LOT on when you hit him. Before 1500 they start without feudalism and at tech 2; They also get hit with a series of nasty disasters. You can run them over very easily. They catch up due to gold income/institution leaking from being muslim.

But that's exactly when they shouldn't be at their weakest.

The tech and organization disparity came to be over the time span of the game with Europe gaining the upper hand only at the end of the games tome span.

So it's exactly the wrong way if you are able to dominate Mali early when actually this should be a time where the technology levels are more or less equal (at least less extreme).

 

[Lykus Cerebros]

Personally I agree that the concept of westernization was much more appealing than being locked into a tech Group and everyone having (almost) equal technology due to institution diffusion / developing.

The westernization was a big step and you needed a long time to achieve it while being vulnerable die to rebels. It also felt like an evolution and the rewards were worth it.
My main problem with the current system is how it only affects land units. Ships apparently are always the same but land units are somehow different? If I manage to make the same naval guns as Europeans I should be able to make the same artillery guns.

 

[Nostalgium]

My main problem with the current system is how it only affects land units. Ships apparently are always the same but land units are somehow different? If I manage to make the same naval guns as Europeans I should be able to make the same artillery guns.

This is also a problem because ships were the one area where Europe actually did have a massive, massive lead throughout the majority of the game's timeframe. In the last 100 years or so the army doctrines and technology also started pulling ahead, but European ships were supreme pretty much from the first carracks capable of crossing the Atlantic.

 

[yyrkroon]

If the institutions were limited to cultural developments, such as renaissance and enlightenment, a good compromise would be to implement some sort of permanent -2 unrest per embraced institution to represent how culturally alien they are to TROTW cultures. Even today, there are several notable "Eastern Empires" that make a distinction between "human rights" and "western rights."

So you could keep up with tech and western ideas as the elite/ruling class, but the unrest would show that the common people in those countries would always view these things with suspicion and hostility, yearning for the safe ignorance of tradition instead.

 

[Word_Smith]

I don't know why this is framed as a Europe player vs ROTW player phenomenon. I loved playing ROTW nations pre-institutions. Having to struggle as a non-Western nation was a unique experience that made for an entirely different style of play. Now, when I play in the ROTW, it's the same as playing in Europe. It's homogenous and boring.

That's not even addressing how the relationship between tech disparity and time was inverted. Back in EU3/pre-institutions EU4, ROTW were largely on par, if not superior technologically compared to Western Europe at gamestart. It was only over time that the tech disparity grew and you had to adapt to the changing global politics as the world became more interconnected and European tags became power players you had to scheme around. Now, every nation plays the same; it doesn't matter if some tags end up with a few more monarch points by the end of the game compared to others. The playthroughs still feel identical.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

pre-institutions EU4, ROTW were largely on par, if not superior technologically compared to Western Europe at gamestart.

There was no EU 4 patch where this has ever been true. At best, they'd start with the same tech and 40% tech penalty or more, permanently, until westernization.

Expecting a real-world tech scenario in the 1700s with the game's model and with no mechanics to give regard to what happened in the last 300 years based on preference is one thing. Calling that out based on history is objectively false.

While the mission setup could work if implemented differently, that also breaks causality hard. Massive differences in capability based on TAG alone, even if you hold literally everything else identical.

 

[Kapi96]

Completely disagree. I think it's great that institutions can be found elsewhere rather than just Europe. IMO Printing Press should be able to spawn in China too rather than just Germany or Protestant/Reformed provinces.

I also see no reason why Europe should get priority for the later ones either. It would be bad for gameplay reasons and ahistorical. Europe was never "destined" to be technologically advanced compared to Africa/Asia etc. It would be silly to try and force it to be that way every single game.

 

[Word_Smith]

There was no EU 4 patch where this has ever been true. At best, they'd start with the same tech and 40% tech penalty or more, permanently, until westernization.

At no point did I say that non-European countries did not start the game with a research speed penalty. The tech level was similar/superior, not the speed at which new techs were acquired. Hence why global power dynamics would shift as the game progressed, as they did in the Age of Colonialism.

Expecting a real-world tech scenario in the 1700s with the game's model and with no mechanics to give regard to what happened in the last 300 years based on preference is one thing. Calling that out based on history is objectively false.

The game you are arguing for is not what the Europa Universalis series was originally designed to be. By your reasoning, the ideally historical EU4 experience should throw out nearly every scripted event and institution because of the butterfly effect. EU4 history was meant to echo history as it played out in real life, not as it plays out in games of Sid Meyer's Civilization.

IMO Printing Press should be able to spawn in China too rather than just Germany or Protestant/Reformed provinces.

Do you think that the printing press would have arisen out of and become popular within a culture that wrote in a language with a non-alphabetic script?

 

[Lykus Cerebros]

Completely disagree. I think it's great that institutions can be found elsewhere rather than just Europe. IMO Printing Press should be able to spawn in China too rather than just Germany or Protestant/Reformed provinces.

I also see no reason why Europe should get priority for the later ones either. It would be bad for gameplay reasons and ahistorical. Europe was never "destined" to be technologically advanced compared to Africa/Asia etc. It would be silly to try and force it to be that way every single game.

Similar designs of the printing press were known in China. Yet this did not result in a similar expansion of knowledge and learning as it did in Europe. So there is a case to make why it should focus on Europe.

 

[Kapi96]

Similar designs of the printing press were known in China. Yet this did not result in a similar expansion of knowledge and learning as it did in Europe. So there is a case to make why it should focus on Europe.

Didn't, but could have.

Besides, I'd argue that the printing press taking off in China was much more likely than some other stuff that can happen in the game, so why shouldn't that be able to happen too?

 

[necro84]

This is also a problem because ships were the one area where Europe actually did have a massive, massive lead throughout the majority of the game's timeframe. In the last 100 years or so the army doctrines and technology also started pulling ahead, but European ships were supreme pretty much from the first carracks capable of crossing the Atlantic.

Are you sure? I think ships used by Zheng He could be better than European. Just look at the model of XV century Chinese treasure ship - each ship had a crew of 500-600 men. European carracks were much smaller. Mid XVI century Galleons were similar in size

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The tech level was similar/superior

No nation has had > tech 3 in any EU 4 patch. At best, nations started equal tech. Western, Eastern, Ottoman, Muslim, Horde. After that, every other nation started with both a lower tech and a much higher tech penalty than being institutions behind gives now.

Nations started pretty close to equal, and that evaporated in a couple decades, permanently.

The game you are arguing for is not what the Europa Universalis series was originally designed to be.

We are not discussing the series as a whole. We are discussing EU 4. EU 4's model/rules define what "should" happen in it. And making random Indian nations *necessarily* much worse in technology unless they jump through arbitrary hoops is arbitrary. Even more so since those positions are already at a very significant disadvantage compared to European starts. Which a few people disagreed with, but nobody bothered to actually refute lol.

EU4 history was meant to echo history as it played out in real life, not as it plays out in games of Sid Meyer's Civilization.

Nothing says "echos of history" as a design goal like the three mountains and one faith achievements .

Similar designs of the printing press were known in China. Yet this did not result in a similar expansion of knowledge and learning as it did in Europe. So there is a case to make why it should focus on Europe.

There is also a case to make that had things gone slightly differently, the results would have altered history so much that we wouldn't recognize the resulting world.

Just having Mughals/Qing not happen completely alters what *should* be the result in India/China for anybody making a coherent case for basing events on "history".

 

[Word_Smith]

Nothing says "echos of history" as a design goal like the three mountains and one faith achievements .

Having an achievement for a particular feat =/= that feat being a core part of the game.

Left 4 Dead 2 had an achievement earned by carrying a garden gnome with you for an entire level, but that doesn't mean babysitting garden gnomes was a core part of Left 4 Dead.