Ruler/Royal Familiy tree expansion/overhaul for EU4 and things realted to it

[Picard 359]

I personally don't see problem if EU IV become more similar to CKII in this game mechanic, in EU game period diplomatic marriages and other things related to that still be important part of politics in Europe and other countries. But I suggest much wider changes to ruler mechanic and its skills system and other things.

These games still will have big differences in other main game mechanic like ruler/vassal system, religion and many others, for me this is right time (when Paradox/EU team is bring back its focus on Europe) for refresh/rework old ruler/RF/PU system.This part of game isn't changed from previous EU games too much and definitely need refresh.

Also another pros for rework is that now Paradox get XP how can to made it (because it learn while work on Imperator Rome) and can use this XP to refresh on one way these mechanic in EU IV (I don't mean that it made entire copy/paste of Imperator Rome system but that it be inspiration for changes)

 

[GundamMerc]

I personally don't see problem if EU IV become more similar to CKII in this game mechanic, in EU game period diplomatic marriages and other things related to that still be important part of politics in Europe and other countries. But I suggest much wider changes to ruler mechanic and its skills system and other things.

These games still will have big differences in other main game mechanic like ruler/vassal system, religion and many others, for me this is right time (when Paradox/EU team is bring back its focus on Europe) for refresh/rework old ruler/RF/PU system.This part of game isn't changed from previous EU games too much and definitely need refresh.

Also another pros for rework is that now Paradox get XP how can to made it (because it learn while work on Imperator Rome) and can use this XP to refresh on one way these mechanic in EU IV (I don't mean that it made entire copy/paste of Imperator Rome system but that it be inspiration for changes)

The issue here is that while all of this might apply to Europe, the rest of the world plays fundamentally differently. There is no PU outside of Christian Europe. While that is not a huge deal in the current game, where dynasty can come and go, and PU are not guaranteed, if this were to change to a system where there was more player control (read: more susceptible to player exploitation), we would be sliding backwards when it comes to balance back towards a Euro-centric game (more so than is already the case.

 

[BrokenSky]

The issue here is that while all of this might apply to Europe, the rest of the world plays fundamentally differently. There is no PU outside of Christian Europe. While that is not a huge deal in the current game, where dynasty can come and go, and PU are not guaranteed, if this were to change to a system where there was more player control (read: more susceptible to player exploitation), we would be sliding backwards when it comes to balance back towards a Euro-centric game (more so than is already the case.

That's true if it came in isolation, but if it came as part of an expansion which focused on adding depth to various different government types, as a whole it might not be.

 

[Xdevo]

Except EU IV actually does have a heavy focus on trading. This was a time period where the amount of trade and exploitation of overseas assets increased exponentially. Dynastic influence actually went DOWN throughout the timeline, whereas trade went up.

Not really sure what history books you've been reading, but dynasties were a huge focus of European and colonial affairs for the entire gameframe. One of Napoleon's most common political actions was placing his family on the thrones of various European states, including Spain, and Naples/King of the Two Sicilies. He also made it a point to marry into the royal dynasties of Europe. The Congress of Vienna specifically acted with Dynastic parity, and most of the balance in Italy and Germany was based on dynastic lines. Considering that nearly every single major (and a lot of minor) wars of Europe in the period were based on some dynastic issue or another, I can't see how one could say its not important. Its a defining part of the period, just as much as colonization, exploration, or the rise of professional armies — all of which have gotten far more attention than the dynastic aspect of the game.

 

[Pellucid]

The only things I really feel need to be changed are:

If there's a second heir, tell us. Don't just randomly decide when it becomes relevant.

When you have a regency and your heir comes of age, the game should immediately roll for a consort from all of your current royal marriages instead of only rolling when you actually establish the marriage.

 

[Ivashanko]

The issue here is that while all of this might apply to Europe, the rest of the world plays fundamentally differently. There is no PU outside of Christian Europe. While that is not a huge deal in the current game, where dynasty can come and go, and PU are not guaranteed, if this were to change to a system where there was more player control (read: more susceptible to player exploitation), we would be sliding backwards when it comes to balance back towards a Euro-centric game (more so than is already the case.

The problem with this argument is a game that isn't Euro-centric hasn't made the game more interesting for most non European powers: by and large it had just made everything more generic. Islamic countries should play extremely differently than European ones. Adding a key fundamental difference to Europe in this year's big patch, and then big differences to other parts of the world, would go a long way towards making the whole game better.

 

[Picard 359]

are EU IV devs mentioned any changes in ruler/RF/PU system in upcoming European expansion yet in dev diaries?

 

[PhoenixG]

They haven't mention anything about gameplay stuff. imo you need wait a few months before the start chiming in those stuff.