Monday at Europa Universalis IV - The Art of War Feature Presentation

[Rabid]

Theodoro was ruled by Trebizondian magnates so its primary culture should be Greek. The countryside was generally hellenised/Pontic in the widest sense or whatever. there's no such thing as Goths or a Gothic principality through and through ruling over a 7 base tax province in the the time frame. My eyes couldn't roll enough. Makuria is also a stretch but oh well, its the corner of the world.

Which brings me to my big rant piece... I love the changes of the expansion to the point where I cant bring myself to play current EU4, but I really have to ask, how does the QA team is dealing with balance issues with all these new provinces?

Really from what I see Moscovy wouldnt have to bother with Lithuania to grow big, with so many provinces in the Caucasus theyd just rush straight there and become a superpower, while in real life Im pretty theyd would rather forgo all of Siberia just to rule over White Russia and Kiev. Lithuania was already in military decline and one of the reasons of the Union was their increased need for Poland to intervene in favour of them vs Moscow.

Why Crimea has so many provinces? The Black was a crucial region for the Ottoman Empire (and Byzantium before them) because it was its main supply of grain, but beyond the handful of trade centres they wouldnt bother to directly rule over it. Right now it looks like conquering Hungary as Turkey is the most unattractive thing ever compared to Crimea/Caucasus.

Nine-province Baluchistan? I need assurance that the devs are conscious of of having to balance all these new provinces so that each country feels right, especially given that the killer app of a province - base tax - is one of the most un-balanced, abstracted and overall controversial thing in the game. I welcome small improvements here and there like the new provinces in Spain, but I'm increasingly afraid that the devs have gone too far to answering the calls for increased ROTW representation. Of course, that should have happened much sooner, but when Northern Italy, the jewel of Europe for most of the timeframe becomes a lame backwater, things start to feel very off.

I appreciate your concerns but this seems premature when we don't know the base tax of any of these new provinces. I expect many of them to have simply kept similar values to the old provinces, which for example would put Baluchistan at a fairly weak ~20-30 base tax with its 9 1-4 base tax provinces. In any case, in terms of raw tax / production income and manpower, Asia's provinces (outside of the most sparsely populated Horde provinces) should be far stronger than Europe's on average, which I strongly suspect will still not be the case because of the necessity for Europe to dictate the game's pacing in most games.

As for Theodoro, blame the people who get fanatical over dead cultures and empires. I can forgive them for a few ahistorical states like this - a reformed Byzantium is barely more plausible - and I expect that they will be unlikely to hang around for long in most games.

 

[mcmanusaur]

All that's really left needing improvement are central/southern Africa and the North American Pacific coast. Then I guess Europe could use some minor changes as well, if just because we're so used to the current province layout. But all in all this expansion is looking incredibly solid; I just hope the pricing isn't crazy.

 

[Golladan]

Which are those new states around Kamchatka?

Kamchadals, Chavchuveny, Khodynt, and the last one I think is Chukchi. They're probably there to keep the Iberians out of Siberia.

 

[Outrider]

Which brings me to my big rant piece... I love the changes of the expansion to the point where I cant bring myself to play current EU4, but I really have to ask, how does the QA team is dealing with balance issues with all these new provinces?

Because a few BT here and there has little impact on overall game balance.

while in real life Im pretty theyd would rather forgo all of Siberia just to rule over White Russia and Kiev.

In real life, rulers had concerns over other things than "where is the richest place we can expand." If historical Russia ignored the Caucasus, that isn't a reason to make it have unappealing BT in game.

Of course, that should have happened much sooner, but when Northern Italy, the jewel of Europe for most of the timeframe becomes a lame backwater, things start to feel very off.

A backwater implies that it is poor and technologically inferior. Neither of these happen. It is still one of the richest regions of the game and a prize to take whenever possible, leaving it always owned by someone with top-tier tech.

 

[Demetrios]

Cool? It's great!

Finally you can play as Inca without dying out of boredom.

Oh, beautiful. And we finally get the lower Amazon region as explorable land! One of my two biggest pet peeves of the map (the lack of a Sahel link between west and east Africa is the other, and another post appears to say that it's finally in as well), as Manaus was settled in 1693.

 

[Demetrios]

Makuria is also a stretch but oh well, its the corner of the world.

Makuria is in? I assume it is Muslim, as the Banu Kanz had taken over not long before the start of the game. Alodia was the Christian Nubian kingdom that most likely survived in some form at the start of the game - is it in as well?

 

[Labrynian Rebel]

Whoa

The horrible Aztec and Maya ahistoriblobs are gone! Incas are no longer boring! South American tribes on the coast! Amazon River is now explorable! New wasteland in middle eastern deserts, the Guinea coasts and borneo are amazing! New un-wasteland in the sahel? Amazing! Rheinland and English Coast trade nodes? Awesome! Better borders.... EVERYWHERE! OUTSTANDING!

Crimean Goths? Really cool (Should be in CK II grumble grumble) but you should at least make them have Greek as their primary culture, or at LEAST as an accepted culture to better reflect what's going on there. And I hope we get an event that spawns the nation of the Sulu Sultanate, and give them claims on Borneo lands, oh and a Burnei mission to vassalize them. That's... pretty much my only suggestions, pretty much all of my pet peeves are being fixed!

Life is good :happy:

 

[Golladan]

Makuria is in? I assume it is Muslim, as the Banu Kanz had taken over not long before the start of the game. Alodia was the Christian Nubian kingdom that most likely survived in some form at the start of the game - is it in as well?

 

[Novacat]

Notes:
You cannot make a march bigger than 60 basetax
You can have a max of 7 cardinals
The Chinese revolter tags are gone, so breaking up and eating China will no longer be easy

Overall, it seems like Catholicism is getting dethroned as the 'best religion'. The new Catholicism is a lot more attractive for smaller countries, but large countries can no longer monopolize the curia.

Nine-province Baluchistan? I need assurance that the devs are conscious of of having to balance all these new provinces so that each country feels right, especially given that the killer app of a province - base tax - is one of the most un-balanced, abstracted and overall controversial thing in the game. I welcome small improvements here and there like the new provinces in Spain, but I'm increasingly afraid that the devs have gone too far to answering the calls for increased ROTW representation. Of course, that should have happened much sooner, but when Northern Italy, the jewel of Europe for most of the timeframe becomes a lame backwater, things start to feel very off.

The problem with Russian expansion into the Caucasus and Far East has more to do with the ROTW weakness then the wealth of asian regions. The Steppe Hordes were not exactly a pushover, and even after Russia finally defeated the Siberian steppe hordes in the 1600s, it was still kept in check by the Manchus/Qing, wheras ingame Russia just marches a 100K doomstack over and continues conquering everything. Crimea likewise was largely kept alive both by Crimean tactics and troops, and Ottoman support. IMO, conquering somewhere like India or China should be an enormous undertaking, but if you manage to pull it off, extremly rewarding.

 

[Demetrios]

Fezzan and Sahel links? Reasonably historic Nubia at start (assuming Makuria = Banu Kanz)? Lots of new provinces and nations in North Africa? Logical mix of provinces and wastelands in Arabia? All this on top of all the other great quality of life map changes seen elsewhere (explorable lower Amazon being the top there, but massively pleased with the other province/map changes seen so far)?

*Tries throwing money at screen*

I am now *pumped* over this expansion. My main thing about Paradox games are logical and historical maps to play with, and this one is coming through in just about all the ways I could want...

 

[Utretch]

By God they've even fixed up Somalia, Somalia. This is a most glorious day

 

[Mauer]

There should be a new achievement for starting as Theodoro and retaking the provinces of Götaland.

 

[Freudia]

You cannot make a march bigger than 60 basetax

So let me get this straight. You cannot annex a march, but you cannot make huge marches (60 base tax is like seven provinces in Europe) either.

Do they still take up diplo slots?

 

[Andy_Dandy]

There should be a new achievement for starting as Theodoro and retaking the provinces of Götaland.

Oh yeah! Even though I couldn't care less for achievements, I did like the sound of that one.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

Do they still take up diplo slots?

Of course.

 

[Freudia]

Of course.

Sounds like marches aren't going to be very useful then, just because of the upper limit of base tax.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

Sounds like marches aren't going to be very useful then, just because of the upper limit of base tax.

I'd rather say: They won't be a non-brainer decission.

 

[Freudia]

I'd rather say: They won't be a non-brainer decission.

Well, look at it this way: If I'm going to have vassals I can't annex, then I want them to be realistic vassals. If I'm playing Austria, then say I want a vassal for all of Italy, and a vassal for all of France, and a vassal for all of the South Slavs or Byzantium and so on. I don't want a "Naples vassal and a Tuscany vassal and a Savoy vassal", I want an "Italy" vassal. An upper limit on base tax prohibits me from having cultural region vassals that actually encompass the entire culture group.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

Well, look at it this way: If I'm going to have vassals I can't annex, then I want them to be realistic vassals. If I'm playing Austria, then say I want a vassal for all of Italy, and a vassal for all of France, and a vassal for all of the South Slavs or Byzantium and so on. I don't want a "Naples vassal and a Tuscany vassal and a Savoy vassal", I want an "Italy" vassal. An upper limit on base tax prohibits me from having cultural region vassals that actually encompass the entire culture group.

Nah, what's the fun in that? Neither is it very realistic. I guess you also want them never to revolt, and always do your bidding, even if they could grow so huge?

 

[Freudia]

Nah, what's the fun in that? Neither is it very realistic.

It's clean. That's the fun in it. It's clean both by borders and by cultures. Also given that northern Italy was a client state under Napoleon, it's not that much of a stretch to have a "larger Napoleonic Italy" or something of that sort.