Suggestion: an overhaul to technology group

[tjknv]

I apologize if similar ideas have been proposed on this forum before.

I've read many complaints on the forum over how the setup of tech-groups are unreasonable (e.g. China and sub-Saharan have the same tech rate, Westernization is too easy/obscure, and of course the ever-present quarrel between historical simulation and game balance).

How about give countries different separate tech speeds in the three categories? For example give China better admin tech speed to reflect its historical governance large empire, but lower diplomacy and military speed to reflect its relative lack of enthusiasm in expanding foreign trade and military technology. Give Portugal and the Netherlands a large boost in diplomacy tech speed, and give the nomads much better military tech speed (but possibly worse diplomacy tech speed) than they do have now. This should add some flavors to play as different countries, and pave the way for related events/decisions/missions.

Countries should be able to increase tech speed in one category through decisions, at the expense of the other two categories (similar to the Victoria 2 research types, or expand the current faction system), though this should be done at a cost. I personally would also prefer events that change the tech speeds firing if countries have met certain criteria (e.g. increase in diplomacy tech speed after having x number of naval bases and x number of custom houses or x% income come from trade, increase in admin tech speed if a large empire )

 

[tjknv]

I am somewhat disappointed that there have been no responses to my initial post thus far. Would anyone comment on the feasibility of these ideas?

 

[ahyangyi]

How about give countries different separate tech speeds in the three categories?

We end up with a France with fast ADM to celebrate France's ability in unifying and creating a large empire and spreading new law codes to everyone else in Europe, and fast DIP to celebrate France's ability of colonization, and, well, diplomacy, and fast MIL to model, well, France's military prowess.

Then Sweden/Japan/Poland gets good MIL, Spain/Portugal/England/Austria gets goot DIP, Ottomans gets good ADM. Everyone else gets mediocre tech speeds since well they were mediocre. ROTW gets ignored. China gets some special treatment whose mail goal is keep it underpowered.

To be honest I see no good in your suggestion. Different countries already receive enough differentiation in the form of National Ideas so that some people argue it's history railroading. Although NIs are generally considered fine, I see no use for more differentiation among countries.

Countries should be able to increase tech speed in one category through decisions

I even find national focus a little boring, since it generally takes away the possible impact of a 6/6/0 ruler. Now he's usually just a 5/5/2.

 

[BaZERGer]

I even find national focus a little boring, since it generally takes away the possible impact of a 6/6/0 ruler. Now he's usually just a 5/5/2.

Well, if he doesn't live long and you then get a bad ruler in another category, you're still gonna be stuck with the national focus, since it's locked for 25 years at a time.

 

[josh127]

While I'm not against the 3 tech paths being different, I'm more in favor of player choice in how you want to build a nation. Let me choose if I want to play admin focused or military focused. Let you make the choice as well. That's why I like things like national focus. It lets me build my nation the way I want to, but it lets ahyangyi, or anyone else who might find it boring ignore it.

 

[DanubianCossak]

It really seems just like a variation to the general theme, that doesnt do much other than complicate things (for example adding new countries would take more effort).

Personally im of the opinion that different tech rates are a good and useful thing. I see EU4 a story being told, and for this story to develop properly some countries are nudged to perform certain things - and different tech rates are a very good tool toward that goal.

With that said, some of those things could already be done: China could be give adm bonus to their NI idea set, and hordes could receive mil tech bonus instead.

 

[unmerged(652342)]

It really seems just like a variation to the general theme, that doesnt do much other than complicate things (for example adding new countries would take more effort).

Personally im of the opinion that different tech rates are a good and useful thing. I see EU4 a story being told, and for this story to develop properly some countries are nudged to perform certain things - and different tech rates are a very good tool toward that goal.

With that said, some of those things could already be done: China could be give adm bonus to their NI idea set, and hordes could receive mil tech bonus instead.

- so by your opinion eastern and turkish tech countries should be further nerfed because IRL they "fall behind" "west"? But considering that this does not happen in the game currently and Ottos along with easterners dont "fall behind" "west", you just calling for further non-west nerf?

 

[Big Blue Blob]

This needs to change. China having the same technology as sub Saharans is just stupid. It should start at tech 6 or so and have maybe a 50% penalty, while sub Saharans start at 2 and have an 80% penalty. That is, if we are going to do this tech group system instead of replacing it with a sensible system where countries advance more quickly if they have advanced and competitive neighbours.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I even find national focus a little boring, since it generally takes away the possible impact of a 6/6/0 ruler. Now he's usually just a 5/5/2.

You are asserting that the player having even limited agency in one of the most crucial resources in a strategy game is "boring".

I guess "exciting" is when the impact of player choice in a strategy title is diminished then?

The design around monarch points for monarchies, and worse the random nature of becoming a republic (the non-random government type) in a timely fashion in EU IV is among its worst design aspects, so long as this purports to be a "strategy" title. Something that actively trivializes player choice to a large extent with sufficiently bad luck has no place in a game that makes your choices matter.

 

[unmerged(652342)]

The design around monarch points for monarchies, and worse the random nature of becoming a republic (the non-random government type) in a timely fashion in EU IV is among its worst design aspects, so long as this purports to be a "strategy" title. Something that actively trivializes player choice to a large extent with sufficiently bad luck has no place in a game that makes your choices matter.

- to be fair free switch between monarchies/republics from EU3 was even worser design from historicity/realism perspective, afterall we playing in historical strategy game and not star craft.

 

[LinusLinothorax]

I still would like to see a system with which we can simulate the spread of firearms, horses and in some cases chainmail armors via trade routes, so we can throw the military tech-tree for ROTW nations away. Would fit better then unlocking "Pike and shot" with a Siberian tribe in 1500.

 

[makapse]

i think the government form should pop up an event that lets the player/AI chose between -20/+10/+10 for different tech groups, but special goves like celestrial make a compulsory choice like -40/+20/+20 for admin,hordes get it for mil all the while keeping the present tech malus.hence,it will be very much possible for hordes to atleast tech mill fast enough to the west. Now,the AI must learn what to chose like dip saving for colonizers and mil saving for expansionists,but most likely,dip saving when playing the dip game