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

[Duke of Britain]

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.

By "many points", I had assumed you meant development level. No building will cost monarch points anymore, that has been explained in one of the DDs and is not a DLC-exclusive change.

I guess that was a misunderstanding, sorry for that. But yeah, considering that the "poster boy" for the DLC is Charles V, I'd have guessed that the "poster feature" for the DLC would be the changes to subjects/HRE and the core stuff would remain free.

 

[Daddl]

I was quite suprised when they stated this. Before, it was obvious for me that you can't divide this mechanic. But thinking about it, its just not too awkward. Basically the free game stays the same: You have fixed values in every province, only changed by events and modified by buildings. So the same as it ever was. I just think it will make a huge difference in the general game if you now have this DLC enabled or not. As some feared before, that the HRE will turn into a super-developed beast due to all the OPMs, this now will happen with the DLC enabled, while it will not happen without it, if they didn't add other things to compensate this. With developed provinces, everyone will have more money and more manpower, so basically armies will just get bigger. Then games are likely to spit out outcomes with huge differences. I'm pretty sure there is wuite a bit exploitative potential in this, if you enable and disable the DLC in running games. But well, thats something for Ryuku WC runs.

 

[User29]

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

The whole change with development level, bulidings, base production, etc is likely a free feature. The ability to increase the base tax/manpower/production is likely paid.

Yes

The Quote in question

I do apologize, this was NOT in a Dev Diary but in the Announcement of the name of the DLC up at the top of the stickies.

EDIT: And to say it's unclear what he's saying yes to I disagree, If Johan read it then gave a blanket Yes I'm sure he meant Yes to all of it, he DOES usually give one word answers but not something that would so clearly confuse people, I expect then he would have said yes and no or No

 

[Aries666]

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.

To be fair I think the game should be balanced on the presumption that people have the DLC's. If the opposite were true the DLC's would have to be sufficiently limited in scope and effect, so as not to throw the game off, that they would be almost pointless buying and therefore making.

 

[User29]

To be fair I think the game should be balanced on the presumption that people have the DLC's. If the opposite were true the DLC's would have to be sufficiently limited in scope and effect, so as not to throw the game off, that they would be almost pointless buying and therefore making.

AFAIK Paradox decided to change to the DLC system exactly BECAUSE they wanted modular expansion so people without all the DLC's weren't left out.

 

[spyroware1]

Let's face it, the current DLC model for EU4 is a graceless moneygrab with little regard to the integrity of the game as a whole. I have no problem throwing money to things I love, and I will buy the new EP sooner or later. But I'd rather pay a small subscription fee every other month to support the ongoing development rather than the current arrangements exactly for reasons like this debate. You just can't compartmentalise a grand strategy game like it's a pure content game like The Sims or whatever. And getting minor content into hodgepodge packs marketed towards impulse purchases is facebook game -level tackiness.

 

[Katsue]

I was quite suprised when they stated this. Before, it was obvious for me that you can't divide this mechanic. But thinking about it, its just not too awkward. Basically the free game stays the same: You have fixed values in every province, only changed by events and modified by buildings. So the same as it ever was.

The difference is that the number of buildings is capped. In my last game, I dropped Conscription Centres all over New Guinea because, well, I could, and what else was I going to do with my money and MIL points? With the new system, I think most New Guinean provinces won't even hold a single building.

 

[User29]

The difference is that the number of buildings is capped. In my last game, I dropped Conscription Centres all over New Guinea because, well, I could, and what else was I going to do with my money and MIL points? With the new system, I think most New Guinean provinces won't even hold a single building.

unless you're playing a surgent Indonesian power... doesn't that seem right?

 

[Kagemin]

Dunno, from what I can tell so far it looks fine. The buildings are getting a rework (less but more powerful, no monarch point cost), and there'll be a limit to how much you can build per province. Sounds fine so far.
And if you have the DLC everyone gets an additional option on what to spend monarch points on, in that you can increase these development levels (plus the parliament stuff etc, but that's a different matter).

So it seems that we're getting a rework of some mechanics in the patch, and some additional options in the DLC. So far that has always worked fine, can't see anything yet why it would be different this time.

 

[zdlugasz]

I was quite suprised when they stated this. Before, it was obvious for me that you can't divide this mechanic. But thinking about it, its just not too awkward. Basically the free game stays the same: You have fixed values in every province, only changed by events and modified by buildings. So the same as it ever was. I just think it will make a huge difference in the general game if you now have this DLC enabled or not. As some feared before, that the HRE will turn into a super-developed beast due to all the OPMs, this now will happen with the DLC enabled, while it will not happen without it, if they didn't add other things to compensate this. With developed provinces, everyone will have more money and more manpower, so basically armies will just get bigger. Then games are likely to spit out outcomes with huge differences. I'm pretty sure there is wuite a bit exploitative potential in this, if you enable and disable the DLC in running games. But well, thats something for Ryuku WC runs.

I am not really convinced that it stays the same. I ma pretty sure it is not the same. All old buildings are gone (and you could've built them in any desert/arctic tax 1 province!) . Now number of buildings you can build is supposed to depend on development. It means that outside European plains, if you are on desert, in jungle, mountains etc you can build e.g. only armory and fort, but not temple, marketplace, production buildng, naval building, possible replacement of unique building and no quite probably no manufacture as well.

So it looks like it might greatly limit options of people who wont buy DLC at the release. Instead of possibly building 6 lines of buildings + 7th manufactury + unique buildings some provinces will allow to build say 2 or 3 buildings.

 

[Irrukathus]

God forbid that we, the consumers of a great (and improving) game, pay the developers for their time so they can continue to continue to pay their bill. The argument that something should be free because it feel like it should be a core mechanic makes no sense because the base game has a core mechanic, albeit a different one. the developers spent time developing an alternative, which in return deserves to be paid for.

 

[Duke of Britain]

God forbid that we, the consumers of a great (and improving) game, pay the developers for their time so they can continue to continue to pay their bill. The argument that something should be free because it feel like it should be a core mechanic makes no sense because the base game has a core mechanic, albeit a different one. the developers spent time developing an alternative, which in return deserves to be paid for.

Senseless fanboyism like this annoys me as much as senseless hatred and is unecessary.

The fact that it (province improvement) will be a core mechanic of the game, and that it can easily affect balance, is enough of a reason to include it in the free patch. I don't think anyone in this thread has suggested that the DLC should be free, no, but rather that mechanics like this belong to the free patch. When 1.8 came around, Paradox did not force us to purchase DLCs to get the new provinces and this is a similar situation.

It is different to having the religion-specific mechanics be in the DLC, or even the parliament, free cities, subject interaction, etc. Base Tax, Manpower and now Production are all important values of how this game's core mechanics work, and leaving something like their improvement outside of the free patch is pretty likely to cause future problems for patching, since it will limit options unless Paradox completely ignores who for some reason did not purchase the DLC. Furthermore, it can limit modders, given that to make use of this mechanic in a mod, the DLC would be necessary, even if that is (IMO) a lesser problem which was far worse back then when we would get expansions.

Frankly, ideally most players will get the DLC, but such an important feature should be in the free patch, given the current DLC model. If you think that everything should be in the DLC like you have just stated, that's fine, but it'd require a radical shift from the current DLC model back to the old expansions one and likely would only be viable for EUV+. And it would, of course, kill MP.

 

[Mattymooz]

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.

Care to name the other features that are part of the DLC? Cause Other than the Development, Religion, England government and potentially the Vassal stuff, I do not see what else won't be part of the free patch. If you're telling me you would be happy to pay to get to 2 extra religion mechanics and a couple of action relating to vassals, then feel free, but IMO that would be a weak DLC on paradox standards.

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?

Voilla, it changes the value for people with and without the DLC so it is fine

Spoiler: Dev Diary Quote

Finally, the development level also allows you to be able to build more buildings in that province.

Wait?

What am I talking about here? Well, first of all, we have reduced the amount of possible buildings, as a large part were fillers. Secondly, we removed the power-cost for building buildings. And finally, not every province can have the same amount of buildings. Currently, a province can have 1 building as default, with some terrains like desert or mountains reducing it by 1, and some increasing it, like farmlands. And, every 10 development allows another building slot in a province. So Paris may be able to have 6 buildings in 1444, while Figuig can not support a single building.

Here’s the example of a few buildings in the game.

Marketplace - Dip4 - +2 Trade Power - 50 gold
Barracks - Mil 6 - +25% Manpower - 50 gold
Cathedral - Adm 19 - +3% Missionary Strength & +40% Tax Income - 200 gold
Stock Exchange - Dip 22 - +100% Trade Power - 400 gold
Town Hall -Adm 22 -5 Local Unrest - 400 g

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"?

They don't lock you out of it, they lock you out of going OTT with buildings. What if I want to become switzerland and just be friends with everyone? I can't do that because of the diplo limit, and for a good reason too, it makes you be strategic about who you ally rather than allying everyone. I would by no means call it a 'core game mechanic', that would be like creating a DLC for Civ where one civilisation has a unique unit, and selling it as DLC. They changed a unit and locked it to one class = locking a core game feature out

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.

If I'm honest, I have never gotten to late game in my games as after I can beat France, there is basically no challenge left in the game so I restart, but from watching let's plays and stuff, not many buildings are built all things considering. I could be wrong and just an idiot as, again, I don't enjoy late game, but still

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.

Again, never played without a DLC, I always buy it day 1 hence why I said it 'might' be an issue

 

[Waron2014]

I totaly agree that the development is a core mechanic and I would like to see it included in the patch but the same could be said for things like national focus and many aspects from Art of War.
I would like to know more about the new buildings and what bonuses they provide other than the few mentionened in the dev diary, bevor I know that I find it very hard to estimate if I am able to get by with less buildings.

 

[Duke of Britain]

Care to name the other features that are part of the DLC? Cause Other than the Development, Religion, England government and potentially the Vassal stuff, I do not see what else won't be part of the free patch. If you're telling me you would be happy to pay to get to 2 extra religion mechanics and a couple of action relating to vassals, then feel free, but IMO that would be a weak DLC on paradox standards.

So far (And off my head, so I might have forgotten something) we have gotten the following features for the DLC: 1. Unique mechanics for two religions; 2. Parliaments; 3. Government for England; 4. Government Ranks; 5. HRE Free Cities; 6. Changes to the Theocracies; 7. Subjects (We have no idea about that one, and it might turn up to be part of the free patch).

For comparison, there are the AoW DLC changes:

• 30 Years War: Unique mechanics and events for the religious conflict that ravaged Europe.
• Napoleonic Era: Fight for or against the revolution and create entirely new custom client countries on the map from your conquests.
• Fighting with Armies: You can now sortie from sieges, transfer occupation to allies and give objectives to your subjects and allies.
• Improved Diplomacy: Sell Surplus Ships, Fight for your subjects CB, Declare War in support of rebel factions in other countries and new peace options like give up claims and pay monthly war reparations.
• Gameplay Enhancements: Build entire armies in one click, abandon cores that you no longer wish to fight for, and abandon entire idea groups that are no longer useful to your nation.

There may have been smaller changes, but that's the major. Some of them (30 Years War, client states, transfer occupation, subjects CB, abandon idea groups) are very well worth it, but some of those are also for convenience or barely matter. Yet, the number of features is pretty similar to what we have seen so far for this new DLC, even without counting the development DLC-exclusive stuff, which is extremely minor in terms of interaction, but very important for the game's balance.

There is absolutely no reason to leave something like provincial development limited to the DLC, imo, as the DLC is very attractive already and that is the kind of mechanic that would be great for the free patch, much like the disasters and changes to rebels (Revolt risk -> Unrest) were in a free patch.

Paradox does deserves to be supported for the content, I'm not disputing that, I just don't believe this specific feature should be locked away.

Voilla, it changes the value for people with and without the DLC so it is fine

How has that proven your point? Nowhere in that quote is it stated that the necessary value changes for people with or without the DLC.

They don't lock you out of it, they lock you out of going OTT with buildings. What if I want to become switzerland and just be friends with everyone? I can't do that because of the diplo limit, and for a good reason too, it makes you be strategic about who you ally rather than allying everyone. I would by no means call it a 'core game mechanic', that would be like creating a DLC for Civ where one civilisation has a unique unit, and selling it as DLC. They changed a unit and locked it to one class = locking a core game feature out

What? So it is fine to be limited to 1 building in a province because you did not purchase a DLC, and not entirely because of game design? Regardless of whether you own the DLC or not, you will be limited in how many buildings you can build per province, the problem here is that without the DLC, you will be much more limited in some regions and that will considerably affect balance.

If I'm honest, I have never gotten to late game in my games as after I can beat France, there is basically no challenge left in the game so I restart, but from watching let's plays and stuff, not many buildings are built all things considering. I could be wrong and just an idiot as, again, I don't enjoy late game, but still

I don't tend to expand crazily, thus I often end up with a manageable amount of land which, combined with decent management of MP and waiting before teching, can very well leave me with surplus Monarch Points that I need to spend on buildings.

If you game the hell out of the game's mechanics, then nothing of that will matter: You will get your WC provided you are patient to actually finish it. That's why buildings usually aren't built once you start snowballing in a WC or "that" kind of game.

 

[stevieji]

God forbid that we, the consumers of a great (and improving) game, pay the developers for their time so they can continue to continue to pay their bill. The argument that something should be free because it feel like it should be a core mechanic makes no sense because the base game has a core mechanic, albeit a different one. the developers spent time developing an alternative, which in return deserves to be paid for.

Oh great, this old chestnut. Anyone who questions the practice of creating DLC after DLC, ad infinitum, is taking food from the mouths of the devs starving children. Not that the OP was actually complaining about that, exactly. Actually I imagine the devs are carrying out policy decided by an entirely different department - I don't think they keep coming up with this stuff just for the fun of it.

My opinion, for what it's worth - I don't find the content of this latest DLC particularly inspiring - and I do object to being asked to pay for the game yet again. It's often actually cheaper to buy the game than the DLC - what does that tell you?

Personally I'd be more than happy if the devs could simply address the existing bugs and other issues in the game as it stands - and then concentrate on creating EU V - which I will cheerfully pay for when the time comes.

 

[Golladan]

Personally I'd be more than happy if the devs could simply address the existing bugs and other issues in the game as it stands.

This is what they're doing.

 

[Kagemin]

It's often actually cheaper to buy the game than the DLC - what does that tell you?

Base game is 40 bucks, the bigger expansions 15. Since the base game is longer out already it's on sale more often, but it doesn't take long for the DLcs to go on sale either. You seem to be confusing base prices and sales.

 

[Katsue]

unless you're playing a surgent Indonesian power... doesn't that seem right?

And if you are playing an Indonesian power? With base game only - no buildings. With the dlc, probably still no buildings, but you can get more manpower from those provinces by spending some MIL points.

If this was an all-new feature, I wouldn't complain about it being in the dlc rather than the patch. But it isn't an all new feature, it's a replacement for Temples and Armories, which are an existing feature.

 

[zdlugasz]

I totaly agree that the development is a core mechanic and I would like to see it included in the patch but the same could be said for things like national focus and many aspects from Art of War.

Completely wrong examples.
National focus for sure is not core. They do not limit your MPs, if you buy DLC you have more flexibility to shift existing points.
If they took away advisors and gave DLC-only MP bonuses then situation would be similar.

If you have no AoW you can not humiliate rivals or request war reparations. You can not give occupations.
But you could not do it before AoW/WoN anyway.

Now you can build 7 lines of buildings (6+manufactury) plus unique building in ANY province. It looks like without DLC in some provinces you may be able to build ONLY one or two buildings.

I would like to know more about the new buildings and what bonuses they provide other than the few mentionened in the dev diary, bevor I know that I find it very hard to estimate if I am able to get by with less buildings.

I also do not know about new buildings, but eg. armory line gave huge bonuses to manpower. without DLC I can not increase manpower by development nor build armory-type building.Buying Temples (I spamed them everywere) increased tax/income. Without DLC I can not increase basetax nor build new building serving similar role as Temple.
Similarly for any other building line.