Please Make Deving Up MORE Expensive and Make Pillage Capital Weaker

[SonofWinter]

Let's make deving up 10 times more expensive and make Pillage Capital only take 10% of what it currently is and make it so that you can only pillage into provinces with lower development.

My reasons:
Every OPM should not be the size of Constantinople 100 years into the game. Magdebug today doesn't have 1,000,000 people that Constantinople did in the 1400. The rewards for successful Estate agendas should be meaningful, rather than something to be ignored. The rewards for mission tree achievements should also be significant. Getting +1 +1 +1 in Warsaw, shouldn't be something I can do for 60 mana points.

Next, the pillage capital is absurd. How does a 20 dev capital increase my 40 dev capital by any amount, did I pillage ignorance and illiteracy? In game by 1600 a 20 dev province is a backwater, how the heck is it generating growth in a 60 dev province?

The same goes for concentrate development. Sure, the development or pillage should go to one of my primary culture provinces, that are LESS developed but NOT my highly developed Capital.

Unless I'm pillaging or concentrating Constantinople, London, Paris or Wiena, most capitals' development should almost never grow from pillaging or concentrating development.

Also, an OPM shouldn't be able to go from one remote Ottoman province in the desert 1/1/1, that I ignore to a 15/15/15 province in 20 years or less. That's just absurd.

 

[annulen]

The rewards for successful Estate agendas should be meaningful, rather than something to be ignored.

That would penalize countries without estates.

Also, an OPM shouldn't be able to go from one remote Ottoman province in the desert 1/1/1, that I ignore to a 15/15/15 province in 20 years or less

Maybe development should take time instead of being instant operation, and consume mana points gradually so you have to keep all cost bonuses on during the whole process. Note that such change would make forcing institutions much longer, though it's probably a right thing to do.

 

[SonofWinter]

That would penalize countries without estates.

Anarchies are not countries.

So yeah, an anarchy don't generally invest in the growth of its own anarchy. I'm not seeing a downside, that's pretty much par for course, historically speaking. I mean even Hordes have estates, so if an area is more disorganized than a Horde, then maybe it shouldn't be able to invest in development.

I guess you made my point for me. Thank you.

Maybe development should take time instead of being instant operation, and consume mana points gradually so you have to keep all cost bonuses on during the whole process. Note that such change would make forcing institutions much longer, though it's probably a right thing to do.

If you increase the cost of development to that level, it will have the same effect. Paying 200-600 points to develop a province will definitively make you pause and consider where you are investing and it will make developing provinces a national effort and not just stuff you do on the 1st of the month.

Also, I'm personally sick and tired of clicking the dev buttons 20 times at a time. Its getting absurd at this point.

 

[annulen]

Anarchies are not countries.

Anarchies? There are trade republics and some other kinds of republics which don't have estates.

 

[annulen]

Paying 200-600 points to develop a province will definitively make you pause and consider where you are investing and it will make developing provinces a national effort and not just stuff you do on the 1st of the month.

Not, it will make me using meta builds to reduce dev cost, while now I don't have to do it.

 

[SonofWinter]

Anarchies? There are trade republics and some other kinds of republics which don't have estates.

Republics don't have estates? I thought they had Clergy Estates and Burghers Estates. I mean even Dietmarschen has 2 Estates. What Anarchist Republic doesn't have Estates?

 

[SonofWinter]

Not, it will make me using meta builds to reduce dev cost, while now I don't have to do it.

Well, you do you.

 

[annulen]

Estates - Europa Universalis 4 Wiki

eu4.paradoxwikis.com

 

[SonofWinter]

Estates - Europa Universalis 4 Wiki

eu4.paradoxwikis.com

Do these highly specific Republics have something that makes up for a lack of Estates that gives them growth points? I mean the Burghers, Clergy, and Nobles give a certain mission every 5 years while others may have other mechanics like a lot of extra mana or a base increase with each newly elected Dodge, etc?

 

[annulen]

So you've come here to make a suggestion that would radically change gameplay, and now you want me to explain you game rules? Lol.

 

[SonofWinter]

So you've come here to make a suggestion that would radically change gameplay, and now you want me to explain you game rules? Lol.

So you've come to argue and don't have a valid point, is what I'm getting from you.

Let me guess, this wouldn't change anything because the nations that don't have Estates missions receive some sort of a growth benefit which is equivalent to the afore mentioned mission development rewards.

Thanks for that, you could have just stated from the beginning that you don't have a point and just pointless arguments.

 

[moscal]

If you will focused on developing - you will not have mana to upgrade technology, ideas, coring etc.

You will be lika a Lower Egypth in compare to Upper Egypth. Rich target to conquest...

You dont know how this game work. Therefore multiplayer game should be main place to learning and mechanics adapted to good work in MP.

 

[Sidolowka]

Let's make deving up 10 times more expensive

This alone would ruin every single country outwith Europe because dev'ing for institutions would now cost 20,000 mana points instead of the already high 2,000 that it costs now.

Concentrate dev needs a nerf, sure, but nerfing manual dev isn't the way to go about doing it.

 

[SonofWinter]

This alone would ruin every single country outwith Europe because dev'ing for institutions would now cost 20,000 mana points instead of the already high 2,000 that it costs now.

Concentrate dev needs a nerf, sure, but nerfing manual dev isn't the way to go about doing it.

You understand that everything can be scaled down, right? If I need to dev up from 16 to 36, then just reduce it to 2 dev clicks instead of 20 for an institution.

I honestly don't know why everyone is so married to the notion of 6,000+ dev clicks, when 600 dev clicks will do just fine and I won't have 10 cities the size of Constantinople from Warszawa to Raciborz by 1700.

 

[JKiller96]

You understand that everything can be scaled down, right? If I need to dev up from 16 to 36, then just reduce it to 2 dev clicks instead of 20 for an institution.

I honestly don't know why everyone is so married to the notion of 6,000+ dev clicks, when 600 dev clicks will do just fine and I won't have 10 cities the size of Constantinople from Warszawa to Raciborz by 1700.

Development is an abstraction and does not represent population or any other measurable statistic. It is almost totally abstract with provinces just given a number based on a feeling.

 

[SonofWinter]

Development is an abstraction and does not represent population or any other measurable statistic. It is almost totally abstract with provinces just given a number based on a feeling.

You understand that the development of any province in Northern Europe should never reach that of Constantinople in 1450, right?

Feeling or no feeling, the notion that Stockholm, Berlin or Krakow would have development to rival that of Constantinople in the first 30 years of the game, is just dumb.

 

[JKiller96]

You understand that the development of any province in Northern Europe should never reach that of Constantinople in 1450, right?

Feeling or no feeling, the notion that Stockholm, Berlin or Krakow would have development to rival that of Constantinople in the first 30 years of the game, is just dumb.

Constantinople had only a population of 50,000 at the start of the game, so I don't get your reasoning.

 

[moscal]

You understand that the development of any province in Northern Europe should never reach that of Constantinople in 1450, right?

Why?
I think that Petersburg or Moscow Anno Domini 2021 have higher dev. than Constantinopole 1450 A.D....

 

[SonofWinter]

Constantinople had only a population of 50,000 at the start of the game, so I don't get your reasoning.

Populations come and go. Infrastructure is there for a lot longer.

Los Angeles could be depopulated by COVID today by 2030 it would be bigger than it is now because the infrastructure is there to hold that many people and all the conditions that make it a large city, remain.

The same conditions persist for Constantinople, it was always going to remain a trade hub, a crossroad for the East-West trade, depopulation wouldn't change that, the population would bounce back, in a flash. Stockholm was never going to be that because it is a city on the edge of a frozen tundra and importing food was not going to be supper reliable so its population was limited.

Warsaw and Berlin, needed a ton of investment, to make them large cities. Roads, canals, sewage disposal, administration, etc.

 

[moscal]

Los Angeles could be depopulated by COVID today by 2030 it would be bigger than it is now because the infrastructure is there to hold that many people and all the conditions that make it a large city, remain.

So? Who will be work in dead city? How many conscript soldiers or taxes get state or federal government from city of ghosts? Mayan cities of ghosts in 1444 had possibility to be place of living for greater population than Paris, London or Rome, but in this period hardly anyone lived in them. Close to full mayan population lived in forests, therefore development in mayan region is low, and facts that "here is ifranstructure" dont mean.

Development mean nor population nor GDP nor infrastructure nor other points. Development mean "now many central government can have profits type X from this land". Understanting this will open way to knowing "what the hell this game mean".