Paradox, please real Westernization

[Afinati]

It's not fluid enough, it's unnervingly rampant in the AI, it's too easy to achieve for the player, and it definitely should occur in stages like in EU3. Also, tech levels aren't even that meaningful in this game. You can be at similar tech levels when not having western tech ... very routinely. After the 16th century, which non-western states had comparable technological advancements? Perhaps the tech cost penalties for non-western states should slowly scale up.

This mechanic has stuck out for me like a sore thumb since the game's release. And with protectorates, a larger access to MP, and pausable westernization the issue has only been exacerbated. Doooo something to increase the rarity, difficulty, and believability of westernization ... if not in 1.14, sometime soon. Please.

Edit: I made an error naming the thread. But I guess it works. Wish I could change a thread's name, but it's fine.

 

[grommile]

It's not fluid enough, it's unnervingly rampant in the AI, it's too easy to achieve for the player, and it definitely should occur in stages like in EU3.

EU3's Westernization was made of spiders and hate, and should not be mentioned in a serious proposal to improve Westernization in EU4 even if you are taking ideas from it.

Also, tech levels aren't even that meaningful in this game. You can be at similar tech levels when not having western tech ... very routinely.

The meatbag can. The box of sand, not so much. (Heck, the AI manages to fall behind as Eastern tech with disturbing ease.)

 

[Afinati]

EU3's Westernization was made of spiders and hate, and should not be mentioned in a serious proposal to improve Westernization in EU4 even if you are taking ideas from it.

The meatbag can. The box of sand, not so much. (Heck, the AI manages to fall behind as Eastern tech with disturbing ease.)

EU3's could rip apart a country trying to westernize and often did, and having to go up in tiers made for a satisfying slope. I haven't played it in a few years, but I don't remember it as worse than EU4's.

 

[Freudia]

After the 16th century, which non-western states had comparable technological advancements? Perhaps the tech cost penalties for non-western states should slowly scale up.

Here's a counter-question. Before the 18th century, what European states had better tech than anywhere not in the New World?

Europe started inching ahead towards the end of the period, not the middle. Around the precursor events for the Industrial Revolution. Honestly, Europe is too far ahead compared to its historical counterparts for a lot of the time period and it should arguably start behind Asia and North Africa.

I digress though. Before we address westernization, or at least if we're going to make it harder and whatnot, we should also address the fact that Europe sends tens of thousands of troops halfway around the world with zero repercussion. The fact I don't see anyone call for this at the same time as calling for making westernization harder is mindboggling to me.

 

[Afinati]

Here's a counter-question. Before the 18th century, what European states had better tech than anywhere not in the New World?

Europe started inching ahead towards the end of the period, not the middle. Around the precursor events for the Industrial Revolution. Honestly, Europe is too far ahead compared to its historical counterparts for a lot of the time period and it should arguably start behind Asia and North Africa.

I digress though. Before we address westernization, or at least if we're going to make it harder and whatnot, we should also address the fact that Europe sends tens of thousands of troops halfway around the world with zero repercussion. The fact I don't see anyone call for this at the same time as calling for making westernization harder is mindboggling to me.

I've been an advocate for ways to limit Europe's military presence overseas in the past. And I'd say that, yeah, Europe should start behind China and the Muslim states. But by the mid-1600's, the various forms of wealth and new land opportunities that flowed in from the New World solidly pulled them ahead. By the beginning of the 18th century. Europe dominated the world. Sure, it took until the century's end for boots to be on the ground everywhere ... but the game somewhat models that. Europe still could knock around anybody else at the time. And they'd already started to poke holes in innovation during the 15-16th century Italian and Northern Renaissance.

Side note: Didn't North Africa used to start ahead in tech? I remember it having been harder to defeat Tunis, Algeria, and Morocco aa Castile or Portugal in the past...

 

[frolix42]

Here's a counter-question. Before the 18th century, what European states had better tech than anywhere not in the New World?

2 ez.

Zheng Zhilong had adapted European technology throughout his maritime career, decking his ships with European cannons and mercenaries, but in 1633 he had built a new fleet according to European designs: whereas most Chinese junks held at most eight smaller cannons, Zheng's new ships had two reinforced gundecks that could hold up to thirty-six large guns, shooting out of Western-inspired gunports.[5] Putmans would later write about these ships in admiration: "Never before in this land so far as anyone can remember, has anyone seen a fleet like this, with such beautiful, huge, well-armed junks."[6]

However, the new fleet was not given a chance to prove its worth against the Dutch, for it had offered no resistance against the Dutch as they sailed around Gulangyu Island into the harbour of Amoy, thinking they were friendly. The Dutch fired at the Chinese fleet without warning, and as soon as it was apparent that the Chinese would not be able to shoot back, Putmans ordered his men to destroy the fleet by hand to save powder. At the end of the day, only three large junks escaped being burned or hacked to pieces, while there was only one Dutch casualty — a sailor had died setting a fire.[7]

Following the destruction of Zheng Zhilong's fleet, the Dutch roamed the seas with impunity, pillaging villages and capturing vessels. Putmans hoped these piratical activities would force China to agree to his demands for free trade; quite the opposite, Putmans's actions had united the political enemies Zheng Zhilong and Zou Weilian together.[8] Planning a counterattack, Zheng rebuilt his fleet as Zou gathered commanders from all over the Fujian coast. Zheng also recruited locals willing to join by rewarding each volunteer 2 silver. If the battle lasted longer than expected, the reward would be increased to five silver. Zheng put the locals on 100 small fire boats, manned by 16 people each. If a boat set fire to one Dutch ship, they would be rewarded 200 silver. If they presented a Dutch head, they would be rewarded 50 silver.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Liaoluo_Bay

Europe started inching ahead towards the end of the period, not the middle. Around the precursor events for the Industrial Revolution. Honestly, Europe is too far ahead compared to its historical counterparts for a lot of the time period and it should arguably start behind Asia and North Africa.

This is also false on many levels. The current status quo of the game is that Lucky Nations Ming remains roughly at the same Tech level at Europe up to and including the end-game.

 

[Afinati]

The current status quo of the game is that Lucky Nations Ming remains roughly at the same Tech level at Europe.

This is so.

 

[Freudia]

This is also false. The current status quo of the game is that Lucky Nations Ming remains roughly at the same Tech level at Europe.

The current status quo of the game doesn't have Ming as a lucky nation unless one or more of the default lucky nations has been taken by the player. I would not count fringe case lucky nation Ming that only exists on a technicality as a counterpoint.

 

[Wizzington]

'Real' Westernization was mostly countries bankrupting themselves trying to reform their military and happened after the EU4 era, so 'real' Westernization would mean taking it out of the game.

So no.

 

[frolix42]

The current status quo of the game doesn't have Ming as a lucky nation unless one or more of the default lucky nations has been taken by the player. I would not count fringe case lucky nation Ming that only exists on a technicality as a counterpoint.

I don't think that's reasonable and besides Ming Tech does fine even without Lucky Nations. It's just a cherry on top of their OP 1.12+ sundae. Removing Inward Perfection has made Ming more fun, but it's unbalanced the region.

Using rote anti euro-centrist dogma is just as inaccurate as euro-centrist dogma when it's applied as a gross generalization. Because China has historically been usually the most developed place on Planet Earth, this doesn't mean that China had always the most advanced Technology except for those moments when it was unequivocally did not.

1444 Ming had decisively begun it's stagnative decline relative to Europe and it's ever-increasing backwardness is apparent in the Tumu crisis of 1449. By the 1500s it becomes obvious, European Heliocentrism, Government, Firearm construction, Naval tech, medicine were beginning to leave Chinese science behind. This gap increased through the 1600s and 1700s and by the 1800s not even massive Chinese superiority in numbers could prevent European imperialism from dividing China. Assuming that up until the moment that Europeans began carving up China that Ming had close to parity with European Tech and Doctrine is the same kind of short-shortsightedness that caused China to stagnate in the first place.

'Real' Westernization was mostly countries bankrupting themselves trying to reform their military and happened after the EU4 era, so 'real' Westernization would mean taking it out of the game.

So no.

IMO it's generous to the ROTW that it gets to westernize at all. If one were to assert that China wasn't very far behind in tech until OOTF, then the Westernization of Ataturk and Meiji are OOTF as well.

 

[Fincap]

'Real' Westernization was mostly countries bankrupting themselves trying to reform their military and happened after the EU4 era, so 'real' Westernization would mean taking it out of the game.

So no.

What do you think of perhaps removing westernization and making ROTW units and tech scale better into the late game, to make the game still challenging and therefore (or at least my idea of) fun. With the new anti-blobbing mechanics that are brewing in the next release, coupled with this suggestion, could mean that games are no longer steamrolls into the late game. And it would fir your philosophy of Fun > Realism. What do you think?

EDIT: Changed Historical accuracy to realism

 

[CzokletMuss]

'Real' Westernization was mostly countries bankrupting themselves trying to reform their military and happened after the EU4 era, so 'real' Westernization would mean taking it out of the game.

So no.

So why there is even "Westernization" in the game to begin with? Shouldn't it be "Modernization" instead, when you upgrade to your neighbor's tech group (say, Indian to Muslim) and pay proportionate amount of MP like during Westernization right now?

Speaking of tech, I never understood why there is a separate Anatolian tech group. Shouldn't the tags in the region just start with -15% tech cost bonus while being in a Muslim group?

 

[gall]

Game lack some features, like there is no way for requesting e.g. Ottoman help as enemy of their enemy and get temporary, but huge (and costly) buff to military as Aceh did (or Ethiopia from Portugal). I don't see gunpowder empires forming due to technological advantages (Safavids/Persia get their tech advantage by means of neighbour bonus from Otto and their own inventions and Mughals, what they don't know/have already get from Ottos to fight Persia). Probably gun production in Japan should be also mentioned there..
I don't recall case of successful administration reform based on foreign, not neighbour influences in Eu4 time frame.
Simple fix for great European Armies in America would be high attrition (50% or so) on transport ship at open sea (AI wouldn't handle that). It would be also nice to have diplomatic technology advantage influence success chances in diplomatic actions or make it affect improve relations in meaningful way. Perhaps some form of alliance with natives not costing diplo slot (pointed against some tribe you don't have to rival). If diplo tech difference is high enough it could apply to Chinese as well.
Chinese were backwards in terms of military and navy for a while, but their government weren't that bad (especially if you compare it with feudal Kingdoms of Europe and you take into account countries populations), their products had superior quality (Europeans were eager to buy some Chinese products, but Chinese weren't interested in European goods apart from Silver and Gold).
Ming superiority in EU4 is a case due to game design "the bigger the better". It didn't work like that IRL.

 

[josh127]

Moving out and playing ROTW is a natural progression for those of us who got bored with Europe and their lack of progression. If I start in Europe I'm already in the top tier for pretty much every aspect of the game. If I pick a small country all I need to do is break a large country (probably by abusing allies) and I'm now a large country. Go out to the ROTW though and now becoming a power involves westernizing, reforming governments, dealing with your region when you can't even see the western nations, then finally meeting them when they probably have a decent advantage on you. Now you're going to play catch-up with the hope of later game invasions of their homelands.

I find that a much more engaging game and it gets me through much more of the timeline than a Europe start which is more like, get some allies, destroy France with the help of the allies and take their land. Ok, now I'm simply France with a different color and ideas.

Westernization is a key part of the progression outside of Europe, it's a mid game goal that everyone strives for. It's not something fun to go through, but rather a necessity. I don't feel that making it more challenging or more resource intensive would in any way make the game better.

If I'd like to see anything with Westernization it should be adding their magic button to all countries who are capable of westernizing. After all, getting from the Far East to Danzig would be challenging enough. Why is there no reward for that? I'm really not an advocate of the magic button anyway, so I'd rather it just be gone, but if you're going to have it, it should be there for all countries, not just a select few.

 

[brandonh]

'Real' Westernization was mostly countries bankrupting themselves trying to reform their military and happened after the EU4 era, so 'real' Westernization would mean taking it out of the game.

So no.

Peter the great successfully modernized Russian administration and military within the eu4 time-frame. In the game file RUS history we have

1711.1.1 = { technology_group = western } # Governmental Reforms and the Absolutism

From gameplay perspective, the problem is that Asian countries could not realistically resist European forces after the 16th century without in-game westernization. However, there are other possibilities to address this problem.
We could consider lowering the tech penalty a bit for Rest of the World tech groups. In addition, separate westernization into military reform and administrative modernization. The military one should be relatively easy while the administrative one considerably more difficult. As a result, rest of the world countries could somehow keep the military tech difference within limits of European countries, but lag behind in both administrative tech and ideas, reflecting the historical difficulties for these countries to adopt more European style system of governance.

 

[Afinati]

Moving out and playing ROTW is a natural progression for those of us who got bored with Europe and their lack of progression. If I start in Europe I'm already in the top tier for pretty much every aspect of the game. If I pick a small country all I need to do is break a large country (probably by abusing allies) and I'm now a large country. Go out to the ROTW though and now becoming a power involves westernizing, reforming governments, dealing with your region when you can't even see the western nations, then finally meeting them when they probably have a decent advantage on you. Now you're going to play catch-up with the hope of later game invasions of their homelands.

I find that a much more engaging game and it gets me through much more of the timeline than a Europe start which is more like, get some allies, destroy France with the help of the allies and take their land. Ok, now I'm simply France with a different color and ideas.

Westernization is a key part of the progression outside of Europe, it's a mid game goal that everyone strives for. It's not something fun to go through, but rather a necessity. I don't feel that making it more challenging or more resource intensive would in any way make the game better.

If I'd like to see anything with Westernization it should be adding their magic button to all countries who are capable of westernizing. After all, getting from the Far East to Danzig would be challenging enough. Why is there no reward for that? I'm really not an advocate of the magic button anyway, so I'd rather it just be gone, but if you're going to have it, it should be there for all countries, not just a select few.

I mostly play outside of Europe and find westernization to be not that difficult to surreal in its ease in most cases. The last time I sought for and failed at westernization was the very first time I tried it.

And if it were easier but had a longer or more satisfying process thar felt more realistic, I'd be okay with that too.

 

[frolix42]

Peter the great successfully modernized Russian administration and military within the eu4 time-frame. In the game file RUS history we have

1711.1.1 = { technology_group = western } # Governmental Reforms and the Absolutism

History files don't reflect gameplay balance. Case in point, Commonwealth is never Westernized in the game files despite owning since 1467 the Free-Candy Westernization Center of Gdansk. History files aren't an accurate reflection of the average player's experience, which as stated by @Johan , begins at 1444 the vast majority of the time. And from the 1444 start with Cadet Corps -10% Tech cost + Lucky Nations, ironically Russia almost never falls far enough behind in Tech to start Westernizing.

In other words, the one country which you put forward as successfully Westernized within the timeframe is the least likely to Westernize in EU4.

From gameplay perspective, the problem is that Asian countries could not realistically resist European forces after the 16th century without in-game westernization. However, there are other possibilities to address this problem.

Speaking of the History files, check out how much of India that Great Britain owns by the end of the game. Notice how Portugal has a port in Macau. Then run an observation game. If you want the game to look more like the history files, then Chinese and Indian Tech are OP.

 

[AlphaNarwhal]

Glad to see someone else is of a similar opinion regarding westernization. It wasn't great in EUIII, but somehow they managed to take a MASSIVE step backwards in IV. I took an west African territory in 1600 and by 1650 Songhai was westernized! That's neither fun nor realistic. It's just silly. I know Paradox and Wiz in particular have adopted something of a contempt for historical believability in gameplay, but this is going to far. It crosses into absurdity.

 

[josh127]

I mostly play outside of Europe and find westernization to be not that difficult to surreal in its ease in most cases. The last time I sought for and failed at westernization was the very first time I tried it.

And if it were easier but had a longer or more satisfying process thar felt more realistic, I'd be okay with that too.

I don't care about it being easier, in fact I think it would be cool if Europe went through more of a modernization process rather than the linear teching as well. And no, I don't find it difficult to westernize, any more than it's difficult to twiddle my thumbs. I don't enjoy sitting around and dealing with rebels. I don't enjoy playing the game with minimal resources. I just want to get it done and over with.

But Westernization is just one of many steps you're taking to getting up to par with Europe, and if you want more, you can pick another country that requires more. I don't want it to be more difficult to westernize unless everyone's gotta do it and it will cause the same issues whether you're France or Ternate. Besides, "more difficult" in this game generally means more resource intensive, and I get tired of sitting around and waiting for resources as it is.

 

[Will Steel]

'Real' Westernization was mostly countries bankrupting themselves trying to reform their military and happened after the EU4 era, so 'real' Westernization would mean taking it out of the game.

So no.

But shouldn't the current system be improved somewhat at least?