Hello everyone. I wrote part of this suggestion in the latest dev diary (Sep 17) thread but since I want to start a serious discussion on the matter I start a new thread here.
In the latest dev diary (Sep 17) Paradox announced that large nations would get a discount on developing their capital and later Wiz also said that they are looking for ways to fix the problem of unrealistic high development in weird locations like shetland. While I like these announcements and think it is a step in the right direction, the changes are in the end only half measures which won’t fix the real problem, which is that development right now is too shallow and well doesn't provide the complexity we all love. For most players, I assume, it only serves as an overflow sink for MP and focusing on playing tall is well in my opinion rather boring.
So what is the problem with development? Well, the only modifier that impacts development is the “development cost reduction” modifier and the only limit to developing is the amount of MPs you are willing to spend on it. The different terrain types naturally makes development higher in farmlands, but the state the nation is in is irrelevant. You can have high LA everywhere, 20 WE, be in severe debt, have rebellions and still develop a newly conquered heathen province to a sky metropolis just as easy as you could develop London as England. So in conclusion, the development depends only on MPs and the single modifier and is not nearly as engaging as conquering an integrating new territory. There is no strategy or planning involved in developing, you just spend the MPs and voila.
So how to improve development? Well, the main problem is that there are too few factors that has any impact on development and there are plenty in the game which should have it naturally.
Here is an outline of my suggestion:
The realistic development levels that a province can have during the game should be dynamic and depend on more factors than only terrain. I’ll call this the “soft-limit”. Developing a province up the soft-limit should have a relatively cheap cost, in the ideal case (more on that later), while developing higher is possible but costly. The soft-limit of a province will depend on multiple factors, both static and dynamic.
Static: (these factor now impacts developing costs, but I think they instead should increase soft-limit)
EDIT:
I forgot to write that current existing and possibly new Events and Disaster could impact both soft-limits and develop cost to introduces some unexpected elements. e.g. plagues could spread between countries and temporarily reduce soft-limits.
After a war and the countryside is devastated the development should be more costly, i.e. looted mechanic. Perhaps even paying/being payed war reparations could impact cost as well.
In the latest dev diary (Sep 17) Paradox announced that large nations would get a discount on developing their capital and later Wiz also said that they are looking for ways to fix the problem of unrealistic high development in weird locations like shetland. While I like these announcements and think it is a step in the right direction, the changes are in the end only half measures which won’t fix the real problem, which is that development right now is too shallow and well doesn't provide the complexity we all love. For most players, I assume, it only serves as an overflow sink for MP and focusing on playing tall is well in my opinion rather boring.
So what is the problem with development? Well, the only modifier that impacts development is the “development cost reduction” modifier and the only limit to developing is the amount of MPs you are willing to spend on it. The different terrain types naturally makes development higher in farmlands, but the state the nation is in is irrelevant. You can have high LA everywhere, 20 WE, be in severe debt, have rebellions and still develop a newly conquered heathen province to a sky metropolis just as easy as you could develop London as England. So in conclusion, the development depends only on MPs and the single modifier and is not nearly as engaging as conquering an integrating new territory. There is no strategy or planning involved in developing, you just spend the MPs and voila.
So how to improve development? Well, the main problem is that there are too few factors that has any impact on development and there are plenty in the game which should have it naturally.
Here is an outline of my suggestion:
The realistic development levels that a province can have during the game should be dynamic and depend on more factors than only terrain. I’ll call this the “soft-limit”. Developing a province up the soft-limit should have a relatively cheap cost, in the ideal case (more on that later), while developing higher is possible but costly. The soft-limit of a province will depend on multiple factors, both static and dynamic.
Static: (these factor now impacts developing costs, but I think they instead should increase soft-limit)
- Climate: Provinces with extreme climates should have significantly lower soft-limit.
- Terrain: Provinces with farmlands should have higher soft-limits than mountainous provinces. Also coastal provinces and/or provinces with major rivers flowing through them should have higher soft-limit.
- Capital/Estuaries/Important centers of trade: Should provide higher soft-limit for the province.
- Technology: The soft-limit should slowly increase with technology.
- Trade: The soft-limit should dynamically depend on how much trade flows through or is collected in the trade node that the province belongs to. This will simulate how important trade is for development as well as how the colonizers, merchant republics, and other large empires could build great cities in their home provinces.
- Local Autonomy: The LA of a provinces is an abstraction of centralization. It should therefore have a direct impact on how much effort the government has to put into developing a province. I would suggest a 1:1 ratio between development cost and LA, but maybe that is too harsh.
- Culture: Provinces within the primary culture group should have normal cost. Accepted but non culture group provinces should have increased cost. Non accepted culture provinces should be even more costly.
- Religion: Developing in a province with heathen religion should be more costly.
- Separatism and Revolt risk: Having Separatism and/or Revolt risk in province should severely hamper developing there.
- War Exhaustion, Debt, Inflation: A country with high WE, Debt, and inflation is not in a realistic state to do any developing.
- Stability: The stability of the country should have direct impact on development cost. Positive and negative respectively.
- Power Projection: High PP should make development cheaper.
EDIT:
I forgot to write that current existing and possibly new Events and Disaster could impact both soft-limits and develop cost to introduces some unexpected elements. e.g. plagues could spread between countries and temporarily reduce soft-limits.
After a war and the countryside is devastated the development should be more costly, i.e. looted mechanic. Perhaps even paying/being payed war reparations could impact cost as well.
Last edited:
- 5
- 1
Upvote
0
