No DD today + 1.33 Open Beta feedback update

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Pavía

Content Design Coordinator PDX Tinto
Paradox Staff
12 Badges
Jan 3, 2006
922
12.718
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
Greetings! As we're busy going through all the feedback we're receiving from you in the 1.33 Open Beta, and making further fixes and improvements from all the issues reported, we don't really have any new content to show today. However, I'll go this evening through some of the threads where you've posted this feedback, and try to answer as much comments as possible, to give you updated and more detailed info about how we're doing with them.

If you want to post here more feedback, you're welcome, although I'll ask you to avoid reposting/repeating about some of the more shared issues (AI fort spamming, CB balancing, etc.), as I'll already answer to those in the other threads. ;)

Adding answers to 1.33 Open Beta feedback:


 
Last edited:
  • 30
  • 26Like
  • 2
Reactions:
I already made a post about it on the forum but since you are here for feedback ill put it here too. It seems that when favors and trust was reworked for Leviathan that is broke the trust system for subjects.

I have noticed that subjects' trust increases to 50 if it is below that value and then doesn't increase beyond it. Previously the trust slowly ticked towards 100 to represent a vassal trusting the overlord over time. Now because regular nations tend towards 50, I think subjects do as well.
 
  • 8Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Thanks! I think it hasn't been discussed yet, but there's a problem with hordes and Ming. In the new patch, the AI builds a lot of forts (which is great and gives a challenge to the game), but this makes it very hard for AI hordes to succeed against a crumbling Ming in the middle of their disaster. This is why I think giving Ming negative fort defense modifiers in their disaster (both Ming Crisis and Unguarded Nomadic Frontier), or even tie it to low mandate malus, could help hordes to claim the Mandate. Speaking of which, I would also suggest giving special priority (ai factor) to AI hordes to invade Shun the second they spawn: right now, they will only choose to intervene in the event if they have a set of conditions met, but I think they should invade unless Manchu is bankrupt. This way, you "force" Manchu to attack Shun right when they form, which is the moment they are the weakest. Another thing that prevents Qing from forming is that Manchu does not have access to the Unify China CB (if you disable Mandate of Heaven DLC you have access to it). Maybe enabling it could help Manchu to form Qing in more games.
Finally, I have a question regarding Chinese Kingdoms. Are you planning on adding a decision to Chinese Kingdoms to restore the Mandate of Heaven if it has been dismantled? There exists already a decision to do so in the game, but it is currently disabled. Thanks again!
 
  • 12
  • 1
Reactions:
Please could you make it possible to turn trade companies into colonial nations? (And possibly vice versa). This happened in the game’s timeframe when the Dutch East India company was nationalised, as well as the formation of British Raj.

The ability could enable at Diplo Tech 23
 
  • 6
  • 4Like
Reactions:
@Pavía

- Can no longer annihilate powerful AI enemies through multiple peace deals with all of your allies as they'll unconditionally surrender if on -100% war score and won't accept any other peace offers until the war leader has peaced out. Also, when forts are reverted back to owner after a peace treaty their garrisons are refilled.

Could ye consider tweaking this please so that unconditional surrender only occurs when the war leader has allies in the war?
It's really annoying being hit with war exhaustion now when I couldn't even use this 'exploit'.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
You really don't consider zhang Xianzhong's "Xi"?
If it is because of localization problem, I can make up one
Use the history of the Southern Ming Dynasty, the history of peasant warfare at the end of the Ming Dynasty, the Record of the Holy religion into Sichuan
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Greetings! As we're busy going through all the feedback we're receiving from you in the 1.33 Open Beta, and making further fixes and improvements from all the issues reported, we don't really have any new content to show today. However, I'll go this evening through some of the threads where you've posted this feedback, and try to answer as much comments as possible, to give you updated and more detailed info about how we're doing with them.

If you want to post here more feedback, you're welcome, although I'll ask you to avoid reposting/repeating about some of the more shared issues (AI fort spamming, CB balancing, etc.), as I'll already answer to those in the other threads. ;)
Super apreciate you letting us know rather than saying nothing as has occasionally happened in the past. :).

It really feels like paradox has had a paradigm shift the last couple of months. feels like a brand new company with the comunication, nature of the changes youre making, listening to feed back etc. It makes me hopeful for the games future, and the future of eu5 when that happens.
 
  • 10
  • 4Like
Reactions:
However, I'll go this evening through some of the threads where you've posted this feedback, and try to answer as much comments as possible, to give you updated and more detailed info about how we're doing with them.
Would it be possible to collect together the replies you give today into a single thread and sticky it somewhere for ease of reading? We could even call that the DD for today.
 
  • 4
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Really loving the support the game has received over the last 6 months! You guys have really turned it around and restored my confidence in the studio and brand! As someone who loves the work done for Judaism and Sihkism in recent updates, its strange to me that the CK2 religions aren't accessible via commands/setting or even the nation designer. I was really interested in using some of the Majapahit missions that use the Dharmic religious group with the Jain religion from CK2, but it seems irrational that I should have to do that via the converter DLC that I paid you guys for. Its a broken feature that lacks support. Pretty please with a cherry on top add the CK2 religions into the nation designer and commands at least! It would be really cool if you added 1 Jain/Bon province into tibet/india just for flavor kinda like the Zoroastrian treatment. Could make for some interesting sights if rebel zealots have their way. I would like to list some other thoughts on the state of EU4's balance. I would appreciate if you guys looked at Espionage & Naval Ideas as they're pretty bad. I made a thread in suggestions regarding espionage, but I think Naval ideas could benefit from removing the landing/crossing battle penalty when disembarking troops onto enemy shores that have enemy armies parked on them, Could create some interesting dynamics, policies could also be way better. Some policy adjustments are also in order. 100% Colonial range increase would be neat for exploration + naval to create some interesting scenarios for nations with the right incentives to choose such as a path, such as a Dutch colony in New York. It feels quite formulaic if you wish to play an exploration game currently-- you always rush diplo tech 7 unless you can for some reason afford to get the 3 exploration ideas first. It would be cool to encourage a playstyle where you consolidate power first and colonize a bit later, as was historical. More events that spawn colonies for certain polities might be useful to accomplish historicity or interesting dynamics for the Americas. I think colonization speed could stand to be nerfed a tad as well, as a vast majority of australia, indonesia, polynesia, and the new world remained uncolonised or untouched by imperialism even by the game's end. I've always wondered why when generating a random new world, the trade goods and nations cant be randomly distributed in it as well. The trade routes, trade goods, development, nation diversity/density sucks in the Random New World right now even using fantasy settings. It would be amazing if there was a supercontinent with the aztecs bordering 10 totemist tribes and a fractured incan empire nearby. My main problem is that there is so little guaranteed Gold in the new world that it screws over Iberians and other colonizers via the indirect removal of treasure fleets. Its also terrible that we lose out on the lovely Monuments in the Random New World system. I know that the game wasn't made with all these changes congruently in mind, but it would be of excellent service and characteristic of Paradox Tinto to fix these longstanding issues related to some of these older neglected features. Kachina should be made its own religion for the pueblos with unique mechanics and a few more nations to fill out that region especially california/northwestern natives who were seemingly forgotten about in leviathan. Honestly, Mesoamerica, and ESPECIALLY South America deserve updates, mission trees, touch ups, bug fixes, and more. Its still dissapointing to me that new provinces are off the table-- as these regions really need them to be accurate. Same with Scandinavia, Tartary, and Balkans, each are too complex a region to represent perfectly, but it could be done better is all im saying. Also, it could be cool to give idea groups "traditions" called "Adopter Bonuses", these could be niche bonuses that grow larger as you complete more ideas in the group. Just a few of my thoughts, thanks for taking the time to read our feedback and thoughts in the forums! ^_^
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
not exactly beta related but an idea poped in "our" mind, how about making crimea a tributary for the ottomans. would block one otoman blob path for some time.
 
  • 7Like
Reactions:
@Pavía

- Can no longer annihilate powerful AI enemies through multiple peace deals with all of your allies as they'll unconditionally surrender if on -100% war score and won't accept any other peace offers until the war leader has peaced out. Also, when forts are reverted back to owner after a peace treaty their garrisons are refilled.

Could ye consider tweaking this please so that unconditional surrender only occurs when the war leader has allies in the war?
It's really annoying being hit with war exhaustion now when I couldn't even use this 'exploit'.
As to your very first point, this is intended and using allied nations to decimate a large enemy like that was considered an exploit. War exhaustion is supposed to be something that you experience and manage throughout the game. Its meant to be an impediment and hindrance, alike corruption, and your annoyance is a testament to their change working as intended.
 
  • 3
  • 3
Reactions:
No problem! Any word on the small Emperor IA issue? (Where Hesse and others get the HRE but then can't pass any reforms due to them being too small)
 
No worries, thank you for your hard work!

I would like to ask about the centers of refomation being tied to the center of a religious group in common/religion/00_religion.txt. Would it be possible to remove this restriction or at least give us the modders a way around it? For example, there is currently no way to spawn Christian centers of reformation anywhere outside of Europe. Removing this restriction would open up many possibilities for mods. Thank you!
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Thank you @Pavía for your update. One thing that I'm still curious about is the subject interaction "Start War in Colony" bug which was already reported (bug report) since December last year but has not yet been reviewed or had any response from the dev team, and still happened in 1.33 beta. Actually, it has been asked since May 2021 that the colony cannot start the war with other colonies no matter what type of colony they are.

Is this WAD? Otherwise, it is very conflicting with the description of Start War in Colony that explained "Makes your Colonial nation start a war against another colonial nation or natives". Not sure why this issue hadn't been touched upon since the interaction "colony declare independence war" had already been solved in 1.33 beta.

I also attach the picture here that shows my Spanish La Plata (self-governing type) cannot declare war on Portuguese Brazil (crown colony) with a confusing text "Self-governing colony can't fight their own wars".

20220208231927_1.jpg
 
  • 4
Reactions:
not exactly beta related but an idea poped in "our" mind, how about making crimea a tributary for the ottomans. would block one otoman blob path for some time.
I would find that this should be the given for the ai, the player should be given the option to declare war for vasallisation, which would solve this problem.