• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Dakka

Provide Thee DUCC
92 Badges
Mar 25, 2014
4.880
4.669
www.twitch.tv
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Prison Architect
Originally, I posted this on the final DD of 2018. I was told to post it here instead. It will no doubt get far less views here, but I guess this is the only way I can get this complaints out and in the public eye. Without further introduction:

While I appreciate your promise to listen to feedback, @DDRJake, I would like to take a few moments to give you some feedback of my own.
I was unable to speak much on the development of Golden Century during development, something that I honestly regret as I'm sure some people on the forums who know me would be able to attest that Iberia is my "pet" region. It's no secret the controversy surrounding this Immersion Pack, and I will openly say I wasn't overly thrilled with it either.

However, I am not one who enjoys kicking a dead horse. Rather, I would like to give my personal thoughts on the content itself and how it can be improved in a way that could alleviate many of the woes expressed on the forum, and hopefully redeem the DLC (and patch), at least partially, in the eyes of the community.
These being:
  • Portuguese Ideas - I won't go into detail as these have been discussed ad infinitum, but Portuguese Ideas need to be overhauled. Their current set gives them the worst military in the game and, as a result, one of the worst idea sets in the game. I'd highly recommend taking a look at a lot of the suggestions listed here. Portugal was certainly not known as a military powerhouse (especially when compared to the other European colonizers), but it wasn't a pushover either, and I think it at the very least deserves some form of naval buff to represent their navy that was very competent during the first half of the game.

  • Flagships - They need to have their costs changed. @Van Kasten went into great detail in this thread. To summarize my particular two issues: 1. there is no reason to not take a heavy, especially when all three flagships cost the same amount of ducats. 2. multiple flagships would make sense for larger navies. Something like +1 for every hundred naval force limit would be good and could allow you to have more than one flagship to try various combinations rather than just the "best" one every time.
    Aside: The Spanish Armada giving naval attrition reduction is a bit of a sick joke and should probably be changed, don't you agree? Naval maintenance cost or some such, I think, would be much more appropriate.

  • Pirate Republics - Having these be able to have a much more effective republic and administration than legitimate governments (ie Merchant Republics) is honestly very silly and I think is a significant reason as to why many people refer to these as "fantasy" or "meme" governments. I would highly suggest placing a state count malus on Pirate republics, raise their autonomy floor, or some other penalty built directly into their government form to reflect the fact that these loose confederations were not actual states. Furthermore, some sort of penalty to diplomacy, such as a diplomatic reputation hit, I feel, would be appropriate.

  • The Iberian Map - Without meaning to sound hostile, I would also like to point out that the quality of the Iberian map was not up to the higher standards presented in other regions or patches, such as India in 1.26 "Mughals" patch, the Middle East in the 1.23 "Persia" patch, or even the work done in the Caribbean in the current patch. I humbly request taking some time to do some further tweaking to this region, perhaps using the "Common Proposal" compiled by @navaluiki and the other members of the forum or @Mingmung's Iberian Map proposal for inspiration.

  • The Council of the Indies - I will refrain from going into too much detail, as I have already recently posted a thread on this matter here, but this reform for the Iberians needs to be changed to something else. It currently gives a discount to the exact opposite to what the Iberians did, does not match the description of the reform itself, and should be replaced by a more fitting modifier, such as reduced Liberty Desire or extra colonial growth.

  • Smaller Nitpicks -
    1.
    The Navarra Personal Union event should relinquish Aragon's hold on Naples, should they choose to pursue it, as historically, Aragon split its dynasty between the Crown of Aragon and Naples.
    2. Granada should not have a core on Ceuta, as far as I am aware. I don't know of any historical basis for it, but if prove otherwise I would be more than happy to retract this complaint.
    3. The Reconquista mission should check for Muslims rather than non-Catholics in Iberia. The current set-up leads to Tenerife preventing the continuation of the tree, which is honestly a bit odd.
    4. The Isabel event should have its MTTH reduced from 1000 months. Other historical WiH rulers, such as Catherine the Great and the Ottoman Sultana both have a MTTH of 200 months, despite having better statistics than Isabel. I have already mentioned this to @neondt and I would like to follow-up on this conversation. The only reason I can think of this limit would be to "balance" the Iberian wedding, but seeing as that is already likely to happen through player intervention when playing as Castille, I do not believe a reduction in her MTTH to be that much of a game-breaker.
Anyway, these are my personal issues with the DLC that do not (at least from what I can tell) drastically alter the design of the Immersion Pack, nor require any additionally programming work to be done. Most should be fairly easy changes that can be done in a matter of minutes (such as Council of the Indies or Isabel's MTTH). I truly do believe that most of these concerns are shared by a significant portion of the community unhappy with the Immersion Pack/Patch and addressing these would do a great deal towards the current attitude towards your latest product, as well as be a show of good faith and that you truly are ready and willing to listen to the feedback being presented to you.
I hope you found the time to read through my post and I would like to thank you for doing so if you have made it this far. I can't necessarily speak for the community as a whole, but for myself I will say: I don't hate you, I'm not trying to talk down to you, I am simply voicing my concerns as a loyal customer and what I would like to see from you as a developer.
 
Upvote 0
Great sugestions for Portugal.
As it stands you should just focus on Brazil and paint it green.
I get it it, it's a tutorial nation, no need to be a terribly boring one.
My God look at galicia traditions and ideas...
 
Last edited:
Why, exactly did you feel the need to necro a thread months old, especially since it's obvious that if Iberia gets a full expansion, it will not be as part of GC - which is an Immersion Pack?
 
Why, exactly did you feel the need to necro a thread months old, especially since it's obvious that if Iberia gets a full expansion, it will not be as part of GC - which is an Immersion Pack?

Literally nothing from the thread was adressed, anyway
 
Why, exactly did you feel the need to necro a thread months old, especially since it's obvious that if Iberia gets a full expansion, it will not be as part of GC - which is an Immersion Pack?
I feel that it isn't a necro when the thread is still entirely relevant.
Further, I don't think Iberia needs a full expansion, nor was that asked for (or at least from what I see). I just want the existing GC to be addressed so it is at a more acceptable level for both the tags in question and the community who requests it.
 
Adding to that, personally I'm somewhat convinced by the argumentation that these ideas are somewhat distorted, but they're by no means WEAK, and that view is just completely off given the results of any game after GC patch. Portugal is a very distorted nation because of reasons (difficulty to represent the relations with the spanish crown, 'noob nation' setup). Changing them don't achieve all that much in the grand scheme of things (and may in fact act as a detriment to its educational qualities).

That begging for new ideas, or more clay (why? Are portuguese players worse than average to make up for Marco's proficiency?) takes up so much space despite Portugal being only a singular nation whose total number is one. Does it change the game all that much? Can't you play another nation?
 
So everyone gives suggestions and asks for the game to be improved in areas that, well are not up to standard.
This particular area is way below standard, thus it needs to be adressed.

Playing other nations wont solve the issue. It's still there, and it needs to be sorted.
And yes it would change the game replayability for Portugal considerably, because it would allow for the "noob" players, with their "noob" nation and their not up to your standards skills, to actually try different strategies and play troughs. And yes it's just a single country, just like any other single country in the game, not more but also not less important that needs a bit of tweaking.
 
So everyone gives suggestions and asks for the game to be improved in areas that, well are not up to standard.
Suggestions are left to be taken or refused. Realistically you're more like a car salesman trying to force them into doing what you want.
Additionally, saying it's not up to standard is debatable. If the standard includes… new world natives, africa, south est asia, micronesia, central asia, etc. then it's way, way above the standard.
If you're comparing to, France, GB, Italy or HRE, it's below, sure. But it makes sense: Portugal was not as dominant a player as these entities.
 
Additionally, saying it's not up to standard is debatable.

One of the most picked nations not getting updates on ideas and flavor in the supposed Iberian update is weird and, given how Spain and Pirates were treated, is just underwhelming. One could argue that they got less update than North Africa. And there is no answer why players should wait a few years to get the changes they want delivered.

It can be debatable. But there are no answers to this, then if I dislike DLC should I just stick to some toxic opinion because there were offered no explanations?
 
Suggestions are left to be taken or refused. Realistically you're more like a car salesman trying to force them into doing what you want.
Additionally, saying it's not up to standard is debatable. If the standard includes… new world natives, africa, south est asia, micronesia, central asia, etc. then it's way, way above the standard.
If you're comparing to, France, GB, Italy or HRE, it's below, sure. But it makes sense: Portugal was not as dominant a player as these entities.

This post is comedy gold from top to bottom.

First I'm not selling anything. I'm making valid points, whether you agree or not.
The only one here with a used car salesman attitude is you, as your skewed and biased opinions show...

Also you say that the faction that dominated the Indian sea for 100 years, that by itself shaped the geopolitical view of the world, and forged the first global empire, was not dominant? Someone needs to tell that to the Mamluks, Ottomans and Venetians. Just because it wasn't present in central Europe for geographical reasons, that does not in any way diminish their achievements.
I will leave you some suggestions for you to read:
Roger Crowley : Conquerors
Nigel Cliff: The Last Crusade
David Nicolle: The Portuguese in the Age of Discovery
K.M Mathew: History of the Portuguese Navigation in India.
Those books are cheap, insightfull and accessible.

And yet my point remains. The Traditions and National Ideas do not fit the character of Portugal.
 
Last edited:
Small things that I'd like to see:
The tercio age ability should be available to Castile as well as Spain (just like the Commonwealth age ability is available to Poland as well). Tercio were founded in the 1490s, when the Age of Reformation begins in game, not the 1530s when tech 10 allows forming Spain. Castile/Spain is the only nation that has it's age ability only available for two thirds of the age
The mission tree should be expanded with mission to conquer North Africa and fight the Ottomans in the Mediterranean. That part is sadly missing, I was surprised to find no mission referencing the Conquest of Tunis

Will be more historical have the early tercio in Age of Reformartion and the old tercio later
 
Well i dropped half a dozen of ideas on a suggestion thread with sources, that could easily give Portugal a bit more flavour.
It will probably get ignored.
And this is not even going into all the peninsula. Hopefully in the future it might get looked at. But hope is the first step in the road to disapointment.
Just a few changes would make Portugal more flavoufoul if the bare minimum of effort was put into it.
For example:

Traditions:
10% Infantry Combat Ability
+30%
Trade range

Legacy of the Navigator

10% Heavy ship combat ability
+5% Ship Durability

Afonsine Ordinance

+10% Goods produced modifier
Feitorias

+10% Global trade power
Encourage the Bandeirantes

+1 Colonist
Royal Absolutism

−15% Construction cost
+0.10 Yearly absolutism
Land before Faith

+15 Global settler increase
Open up the Guilds

+10% Trade efficiency
Ambition:

+20% Global tariffs

This set would be 10x better already and quite likely would not change any outcome in Iberia.

I would make the second tradition −20% Morale hit when losing a ship.

Cause ya know, Portugal and the Unknown Seas they braved.
 
Last edited:
Nice suggestions!

Tie them to the number of admirals. It makes sense in terms of flavour (flagships are almost by definition the ship captained by the admiral), it increases the cost in a subtle and imo more strategic way, since now you also have to hire admirals and give up a leader slot, it keeps the number of flagships low, and doesn't cause snowballing like tying it to FL would.

Would this mean that the flagship immediately disappears when the admiral dies, and a new one must be recruited? I like the idea, except that this potential consequence seems a bit silly to me. It would be illogical for a nation to destroy a flagship and build a new one corresponding with the coming and going of each admiral, rather than pass on command to new admirals. Additionally, it would just be annoying to have the admiral happen to die outside of battle, but in the middle of a war, and therefore the player is able to immediately recruit a new admiral, but must wait at least a year - while in the middle of a war - to build a new flagship. Perhaps a solution would be having the flagship simply return to dock if the admiral dies, but it would be unusable or mothballed until another admiral is recruited. What are your thoughts?