Improving World Simulation Would Help The Game Balance Itself
In the light of the excitement of new things coming with the upcoming DLC/patch, I wanted to re-remember all the things I did to achieve the most optimised way to play (which any good strategy game makes the player to do). After few days of multiplayer session, I remember this topic I wanted to write about back in summer but lost the interest after the Mandate and Third Rome DLCs.
Trying to balance a historical game spawns for centuries is a very tough job. Knowledge differences between west and east sometimes block the conversations on each nation's strengths and weaknesses. With cultural and national pride is often seen in any historical topic, common bias approach to historical "facts" is inevitable. To put the cherry on top Google and Wiki historians narrow the discord, even more. Maybe we can agree more on nature of the World.
I believe the Terrain, Climate and Winter features & map modes could be the key to spice things up for balance and add great depth to the planning phase of the game. I come to realize over the years If the simulation or fiction of anything is done right, more unintended good things will come because of that It- has to appear.
TERRAIN
I love the simple map mode. It's my second favorite map mode during the war times ( first being the loot map mode ) but more importantly, It's my favorite map mode during planning times. After receiving more streamlined modifiers and removal of the combat width modifier, the terrain differences received almost nothing, treated like an unwanted child. In truth, it's the base decider of what will happen there. From planning your economy to warfare.
Whats bothering me about terrain types, most of its modifiers are very streamlined. Only few you have to be a mind of and all offer the same -1 attack modifier with one exception. Currently, movement penalties are not offering that much since the provinces already getting locked by forts too. But even so, you don't feel the hard conditions of passing a mountain. That is it! That's the extent of the terrain map mode for warfare, where you can look if you are going to get -1 penalty or not.
There has to be something more to create new strategies, to make more impact on battles than a dice. I believe If we could have different combat bonuses for unit types, the player would be much more interested in composing better armies for the situation or battle plan. Currently, it's about making enough infantry & cavalry to disallow your artillery to come into the frontline. Watching battles aren't exciting but fighting of dice result.
Making Different Combat Modifiers For Unit Types:
From grasslands to the dense forest the cavalries damage is the same. Cannons doing the same damage to units in open areas or woods. Infantry fighting same in marsh, farmlands or even glacial provinces. To some extent, I can understand the removing combat width modifiers from terrain types but after taking up something and giving nothing in return is just devalues the combat aspect of the game.
Giving some examples of what I'm thinking about. Cavalary flanking range could be penalized when fighting at woods or forest but could do more damage when at open fields like grasslands or farmlands. Same as cannons could be doing less damage when fighting in jungle or forest but obliterate at the marsh or open areas. Infantry should shine in more close-quarters situations like the jungle but less effective at glacial or desert.
Making Different Combat Modifiers For Battle Phases:
Of course, not every battle phase should give the same result too! Firepower shouldn't be that much effective in jungle or forest situations. Even in modern times, firepower isn't that much effective if the terrain conditions are not good as history showed in US's infamous Vietnam War.
Woods, Forest, Jungle should favor more shock phase and mash or open areas should favor more fire phase.
Maneuver Requirements For Certain Terrain Types:
Sadly maneuver stat in generals couldn't find a good spot to shine in EU4 but maybe giving certain type requirements to fight in a certain terrain type should give an edge for those who have bad stats but good maneuver generals. Generals like those keep getting kicked out to try "better" one.
Let's say to fight effectively in jungle, glacial, mountains or highlands -shortly, rough terrains- you are going to need some maneuver skills or both sides should get current -1 to -2 terrain penalties.
Conclusion For Terrain:
With changes like these people are going to at least think more about for to approach each war and have different strategies and army compositions for each war. Scouting is going to be much more important to try to figure out opponents tactics who trying to lure an army into more favorable position or what kind of general going to face. With more aspect of the terrain, the world map is going to be more organic rather than just -1 penalty and the battles should be more exciting to watch the battle screen.
CLIMATE and WINTER
First of all climate of the whole world should be improved! From Spain to Russia's center all getting the same results. The climate should start to cool from Danmark and few of the Crimea region should have some arid effect. North of the Caspian Sea and central Asia needs more arid areas too. If you could only observe the real climate maps of the world you would see the difference too.
It's cool to have climate representing in the game. Its main purpose to differentiate development costs but Paradox already put the work into putting map mode and its modifiers but currently, the world isn't represented correctly. If this is because of having an only 3 types of climates maybe having sub-climates could fix this thing and balance the more wide nations too.
Since winter doesn't affect anything but unit supply some regions of the world doesn't represent their true conditions. Because of this some regions of Russia getting penalized heavily but because of few colder areas getting a pass. This also applies to Asia as well as Americas.
Winter simulation is another thing needs some work too. I know Sweden is a cold place and It would be funny to say other places have winter but there shouldn't be that much 'no winter' places in the world. Jokes aside, winter map mode needs some love too. Also in 'summertime hot' parts of the world should give some flavor to other places as well.
Conclusion For Climate and Winter:
What It could achieve is to balance more wide regions of Asia becoming too powerful too quickly. Not to mention correcting the mistakes in climate and winter map could bring the simulation to a better place but overall it's clear that climate having a hard time with only having 3 type.
Epilogue
It's not like calculating crop times or else. With better simulation, things could go more organically as the history. Culture and strength played a significant influence on the history but "luck" factor has a great effect too and that luck is better terrain and climate in history.