One of the big holes in EU4's gameplay model is that there are no internal factions at all - so while the diplomatic, trade, warfare and colonial systems interrelate with each other to provide some balance, the internal dynamics of a nation just aren't there. As they were important during the era, but not modelled in game, the other mechanics need to be skewed to make up for it. Get internal mechanics in, in a fun, playable way, and it should benefit the other systems in the game, and provide richer and more diverse gameplay.
How to do it though? Pops, although great, would be crazy hard work, but you could generate internal factions based on culture groups, and the three groups of the nobility, bourgeoisie and peasantry. So, for each culture group (not culture - culture group, or you'd have squillions to deal with), you have a noble faction, a bourgeoisie and peasantry.
The strength of these factions can be dynamically related to game mechanics. The nobility, for example, can be a function of the base tax of the culture group in question, before taking into account various negative modifiers for autonomy and culture (but including modifiers for idea groups and the like), while the strength of the bourgeoisie can be related to production (so the increase in production efficiency over time through technology naturally leads to a changing balance between the bourgeoisie and nobility). The peasantry can be proxied by a combination of all three. You could also potentially have a faction for trade companies or traders, but I'd probably keep it to these three at least at first, to keep it straightforward.
Each faction has a certain level of 'loyalty' towards the nation, which is influenced both by national behaviour and events.
Each faction then has its interests (non-accepted cultures might want higher autonomy, accepted culture nobility might want the nation to go to war to expand, peasants might want lower taxes and maybe peace once manpower drops to a certain level, bourgeoisie might want more mercantilism and would like wars that suited their interest but not wars that didn't - although to dig into this would need a deeper trade system).
At the moment, there are a bunch of events in game that refer to these various groups, but in game terms are really just a choice generally between MP and something else (which is generally an easy choice, as 90 per cent of the time, MP is the limiting factor). With this kind of system, instead of events which give you limited gameplay and often no lasting impact, each choice influences the balance between the various factions in the game, and how they relate to the nation.
On top of this, choices about who to ally, who to go to war with, when to make peace and the like will also play into the factions (as could choices to develop and where to colonise).
Further, larger empires, while still viable, will actually require some skill to maintain. At the moment, EU4 generally has an inverse difficulty curve. The first fifty or even one hundred years or so can be quite challenging, but then after that you're basically on cruise control (the challenging section may last another hundred years if you start as a small nation next to the Ottos, Ming or France/PLC, but same general principle). This way, as the game continues the challenge increases whether you are a small nation (as lower coring costs make smaller nations more precarious late-game) or a large one (as balancing internal factions means it takes an effort to be functional state).
This kind of system would also work as a great way of managing unrest and autonomy. Instead of autonomy as a figure that ticks down to a pre-set level, players could set the pre-set level for each faction. So, for example, a French player has conquered Spain and wants the Spanish nobles on-side, then they have to set Spanish autonomy to a minimum of 50 per cent - but another French player who wants to take advantage of Spain's resources and has other means to keep the nobles in check can set it to 25 per cent or even 0 per cent. However, if a player set noble autonomy too low, and didn't have other ways to keep unrest in check, then the game generates a rebellion in that region, based on the strength of the faction in that region (so a Spanish noble revolt, for a player that owns the whole Iberian peninsula, would be a huge deal, but for a player that owned only Navarre wouldn't be anyting to worry about).
Edit: Another thing this could play into is diplomacy and potentially trade.
On diplomacy - if you're conduction diplomacy with another nation, and have their accepted culture in your empire, the level of loyalty of that culture to your empire could influence relations with that nation (for example, if France holds Navarre, but the Spanish factions there don't like France very much, then Spain would be less likely to be happy with France).
On trade - having good relations with the bourgeoisie could influence trade collection/steering (particularly in areas where that bourgeoisie faction are actually located).
Edit 2: Probably need organised religion in there as a faction as well, haven't quite got it straight in my head how to go about it though.
This idea stands on its own, but would also work well with other some suggestions I've put together:
Administrative Capacity - https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...imited-scaling-of-mps-with-realm-size.872586/
Development - https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-expanding-the-concepts.872593/#post-19699741
Army costs - https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...appropriate-costs-for-military-action.872591/
How to do it though? Pops, although great, would be crazy hard work, but you could generate internal factions based on culture groups, and the three groups of the nobility, bourgeoisie and peasantry. So, for each culture group (not culture - culture group, or you'd have squillions to deal with), you have a noble faction, a bourgeoisie and peasantry.
The strength of these factions can be dynamically related to game mechanics. The nobility, for example, can be a function of the base tax of the culture group in question, before taking into account various negative modifiers for autonomy and culture (but including modifiers for idea groups and the like), while the strength of the bourgeoisie can be related to production (so the increase in production efficiency over time through technology naturally leads to a changing balance between the bourgeoisie and nobility). The peasantry can be proxied by a combination of all three. You could also potentially have a faction for trade companies or traders, but I'd probably keep it to these three at least at first, to keep it straightforward.
Each faction has a certain level of 'loyalty' towards the nation, which is influenced both by national behaviour and events.
Each faction then has its interests (non-accepted cultures might want higher autonomy, accepted culture nobility might want the nation to go to war to expand, peasants might want lower taxes and maybe peace once manpower drops to a certain level, bourgeoisie might want more mercantilism and would like wars that suited their interest but not wars that didn't - although to dig into this would need a deeper trade system).
At the moment, there are a bunch of events in game that refer to these various groups, but in game terms are really just a choice generally between MP and something else (which is generally an easy choice, as 90 per cent of the time, MP is the limiting factor). With this kind of system, instead of events which give you limited gameplay and often no lasting impact, each choice influences the balance between the various factions in the game, and how they relate to the nation.
On top of this, choices about who to ally, who to go to war with, when to make peace and the like will also play into the factions (as could choices to develop and where to colonise).
Further, larger empires, while still viable, will actually require some skill to maintain. At the moment, EU4 generally has an inverse difficulty curve. The first fifty or even one hundred years or so can be quite challenging, but then after that you're basically on cruise control (the challenging section may last another hundred years if you start as a small nation next to the Ottos, Ming or France/PLC, but same general principle). This way, as the game continues the challenge increases whether you are a small nation (as lower coring costs make smaller nations more precarious late-game) or a large one (as balancing internal factions means it takes an effort to be functional state).
This kind of system would also work as a great way of managing unrest and autonomy. Instead of autonomy as a figure that ticks down to a pre-set level, players could set the pre-set level for each faction. So, for example, a French player has conquered Spain and wants the Spanish nobles on-side, then they have to set Spanish autonomy to a minimum of 50 per cent - but another French player who wants to take advantage of Spain's resources and has other means to keep the nobles in check can set it to 25 per cent or even 0 per cent. However, if a player set noble autonomy too low, and didn't have other ways to keep unrest in check, then the game generates a rebellion in that region, based on the strength of the faction in that region (so a Spanish noble revolt, for a player that owns the whole Iberian peninsula, would be a huge deal, but for a player that owned only Navarre wouldn't be anyting to worry about).
Edit: Another thing this could play into is diplomacy and potentially trade.
On diplomacy - if you're conduction diplomacy with another nation, and have their accepted culture in your empire, the level of loyalty of that culture to your empire could influence relations with that nation (for example, if France holds Navarre, but the Spanish factions there don't like France very much, then Spain would be less likely to be happy with France).
On trade - having good relations with the bourgeoisie could influence trade collection/steering (particularly in areas where that bourgeoisie faction are actually located).
Edit 2: Probably need organised religion in there as a faction as well, haven't quite got it straight in my head how to go about it though.
This idea stands on its own, but would also work well with other some suggestions I've put together:
Administrative Capacity - https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...imited-scaling-of-mps-with-realm-size.872586/
Development - https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-expanding-the-concepts.872593/#post-19699741
Army costs - https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...appropriate-costs-for-military-action.872591/
Last edited:
- 1
- 1
Upvote
0