Is the Division between the Free Patch and DLC Awkward?(Building changes)

[User29]

If you were unaware it has been mentioned in the newest DD (EDIT: It's actually in the announcement at the top of the Stickies) that the new building system will be patched in for everyone, but to "increase development" you'll need to own the DLC

The new Building System will not allow our old and tried method of "Spam All the Buildings!1!!!" and instead we will have to rely on development to build more things in more poorly developed provinces instead of spamming buildings there. However if you do not own the DLC you cannot increase the development of your provinces so... We seem to be getting harsher game.

Obviously this would mean you're gonna have a harder time on average compared to before this change and for Multiplayer this obviously doesn't matter since all humans involved will be equally disadvantaged(or just have the DLC obviously)

But it does seem weird to me to put the division of free patch and DLC here, I'm not shaming Paradox here I'm honestly interested in everyone's opinion here

Also does anyone think this may not be well balanced for the non DLC games? I wouldn't claim it but Paradox does seem to keep in mind a fully DLC'ed game when they make balance changes and new content, because if say you do not own Res Publica you should absolutely never convert to Reformed for example.

(If another thread has already been made to discuss this, I'm sorry, must've missed it)

 

[Golladan]

You built all the buildings?

Anywho. Yeah, everyone will have less buildings to build. However I think people are overestimating how much they can develop provinces.

 

[User29]

You built all the buildings?

Anywho. Yeah, everyone will have less buildings to build. However I think people are overestimating how much they can develop provinces.

Of course not, but I DID build temples/armories/marketplaces everywhere

I agree that maybe this is just one of those things that just needs to be released before we can REALLY judge but I fear Paradox has gotten a little crazy with their DLC(I love them don't get me wrong) but stuff like Reformed being useless w/o a DLC is the kind of problem I'm worrying about for Buildings/Development, The divide here felt awkward

 

[Duke of Britain]

Development is something which should have been included in the free patch, I agree.

It makes no sense to lock that down, it is a very welcome change, but it is also bound to be a core game mechanic, even if we are not aware of how relevant it will be in-game. Changing government ranks is also the kind of thing that should be in the free patch.

I'd rather if they changed those to the free patch, and figured something else in the DLC package, tbh. Even with development + government ranks being included in the Free Patch, that DLC remains so large (Compared to many others) that I doubt it would affect sales, plus the free patch is amazing anyway and I am sure a lot of people will purchase the DLC to support the patch.

 

[Clownie]

It's a problem with the theme of the expansion, I think.

Which is to say there isn't one. Common Sense, like Art of War was, is going to be a grab bag of unrelated improvements to the game; so, naturally, the question becomes "how do we separate this?" It's a tricky question. Easier with the themed DLCs like El Dorado.

For the same reason, it's hard to really complain. Sure, it's a really unfortunate separation, but I doubt it's out of malice – and the expansion is going to make some fantastic changes.

 

[Freudia]

It's a problem with the theme of the expansion, I think.

Which is to say there isn't one. Common Sense, like Art of War was, is going to be a grab bag of unrelated improvements to the game; so, naturally, the question becomes "how do we separate this?" It's a tricky question. Easier with the themed DLCs like El Dorado.

For the same reason, it's hard to really complain. Sure, it's a really unfortunate separation, but I doubt it's out of malice – and the expansion is going to make some fantastic changes.

Yeah, it's a strange problem.

Which is kind of weird considering these grab bag DLC tend to actually be must-get DLC for a lot of general improvements to the game. Even post-transfer occupation nerf, I still feel Art of War was overall worth it, but I kind of feel a little burned by El Dorado despite El Dorado's focus generally being on a select group of nations (natives and their colonial conquerers) so it has a much more refined scope.

 

[Mattymooz]

Development is something which should have been included in the free patch, I agree.

It makes no sense to lock that down, it is a very welcome change, but it is also bound to be a core game mechanic, even if we are not aware of how relevant it will be in-game. Changing government ranks is also the kind of thing that should be in the free patch.

I'd rather if they changed those to the free patch, and figured something else in the DLC package, tbh. Even with development + government ranks being included in the Free Patch, that DLC remains so large (Compared to many others) that I doubt it would affect sales, plus the free patch is amazing anyway and I am sure a lot of people will purchase the DLC to support the patch.

So, what I am taking from this is that you want the main couple of things in the free patch, leaving effectively just the buddhism and protestantism changes for the DLC?

Personallly, I think the split is fine, If you don't have the DLC then the game is slightly easier as buildings dont require as many points which will make it easier (as well as all buildings being better overall), whilst also make you have to strategically about what buildings you want. It seems as though the development system is more for if you can't make up your mind so spend more points on making your provinces better and allowing you build more buildings using cash. I think I can see it making you worse late game as you can't spam out buildings, but people were capped on doing that with points anyway.

The only issue there might be is if the AI will use development when you can't.

 

[zerosius]

It is a unique selling point for the dlc, but i still don´t see it as a big of a deal.

They stated, that buildings will be rebaolanced greatly and it just will be a more strategic decision to plant them.

Of course the distribution of features might seem odd, or unfair, but thats the way you get people to buy your expansion, and the developement has to be financed somehow

 

[MarkS00N]

I can see that Paradox adds events to increase Base Tax, Base Production, and Base Manpower (all of which, if I am correct, contribute to "Development") at certain interval of time, thus ensure the development increases as the game progress even without DLC...

 

[Katsue]

Currently, buildings can add about 50 Trade Power to a province that is not an Estuary or Centre of Trade, and similarly huge benefits to manpower. I'm not at all convinced that the new buildings will reach that kind of power level. It definitely seems to me that, after Common Sense is released, people who don't have the dlc will have reduced options for internal development.

 

[zamieo]

Can we wait and see how it actually functions before we pass judgement on something?

 

[Katsue]

Can we wait and see how it actually functions before we pass judgement on something?

It will be too late to have this discussion by then. If Paradox puts the development increase button into the dlc rather than the patch, I don't see them taking it out again.

 

[Jorlaan]

Wait development is NOT going to be a free thing?? How the HELL can such a CENTRAL MECHANIC be locked off? Honestly if this goes forward I think I'm done.

 

[Duke of Britain]

So, what I am taking from this is that you want the main couple of things in the free patch, leaving effectively just the buddhism and protestantism changes for the DLC?

Wrong. There are several other decent changes, not to mention that whatever they have done to subject nations is extremely likely to be DLC-specific as well. That's more than enough to be selling points for the DLC, while province development (And by extension buildings) is going to be a core game mechanic, one which radically changes every single thing in the game. Money and Manpower are the means to win wars, after all. Development affects everything, from trade to warfare to diplomacy, and I don't see how putting it on the free patch would make the DLC have small or undesirable content, given that it is as large as AoW, if not larger.

Personallly, I think the split is fine, If you don't have the DLC then the game is slightly easier as buildings dont require as many points which will make it easier (as well as all buildings being better overall)

With what basis do you make that claim? Has Wiz or Johan confirmed that buildings will require less points for people without the DLC? Wouldn't that be the kind of change incompatible with their DLC policy, given that it sounds like it would change the checksum?

whilst also make you have to strategically about what buildings you want. It seems as though the development system is more for if you can't make up your mind so spend more points on making your provinces better and allowing you build more buildings using cash.

Poor, half-baked, excuse. How is that an argument for locking core mechanics out of the game? How about you try locking yourself out of diplomacy in your games, because it magically makes you "think strategically by limiting your options"?

I think I can see it making you worse late game as you can't spam out buildings, but people were capped on doing that with points anyway.

Not westerns. Unless you were going for a WC or something of the kind, you'd be able to build lots of lots of buildings.

The only issue there might be is if the AI will use development when you can't.

Fairly sure that is wrong. Without AoW, the AI does not transfer occupation, so why would it use one of the new DLC's mechanics?

Not to mention that it would break the game for people without the DLC, or open a whole new can of exploits by making them necessary to survive if you don't want to expand as much.


Don't get me wrong, I am going to eventually purchase the DLC regardless of the DLC-specific content, simply because the patch by itself is awesome already. However, that kind of core mechanic should not be related to the DLC in any way.

 

[zamieo]

It will be too late to have this discussion by then. If Paradox puts the development increase button into the dlc rather than the patch, I don't see them taking it out again.

You're being awfully naive if you think they'll change something like that a month before release.

Edit: To expand on what I wrote before, clearly they've designed the current version of the DLC/patch with the current division in mind. I'm not a game developer, but I can't imagine that it's easy to change, do correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Rabid]

I do think that this is kind of weird but I also don't like how they put stuff like transferring occupation into DLC; on the other hand, they need ways to monetise the "just make the game better" type DLCs which don't have a strong regional focus, so I'm ok with it. If they weren't charging for these features then we would not be getting such major free patches or as much game-enhancing DLC and we would probably be suffering under something like the old EU3 expansion system.

I suppose one tidy solution would be making sure that every DLC comes with some major new content with events or new regional mechanics etc. but that would mean fewer, larger DLC releases which has its own clear downsides.

 

[LordSolar]

Where exactly did paradox say that increasing development will be dlc-only?

 

[chrnno]

With what basis do you make that claim? Has Wiz or Johan confirmed that buildings will require less points for people without the DLC? Wouldn't that be the kind of change incompatible with their DLC policy, given that it sounds like it would change the checksum?

Pretty sure buildings won't cost any monarch points period.

Also yes I agree with you, really the first game mechanic I feel being behind expansion instead of into the base game is pretty weird.

 

[Katsue]

Where exactly did paradox say that increasing development will be dlc-only?

Announcing Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense

 

[NeverHelm]

It is a bit hard to tell which part he said "yes" to. I suppose we could interpret it as yes to both.