Westernization is too easy and has too little effect in 1.8
- Thread starter TheDarkMaster
- Start date
-
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.
Cultural westernisation was rare. Off the top of my head, only Russia actually adopted any programme of trying to emulate western society during the game era. Following the EUIV period a number of different countries did, with the most prominent examples being Japan and Turkey.
Military westernisation though was frequently attempted in the EUIV period all around the world.
The game westernization is not what Russia or Japan did, as it makes your tech worse for a while. Also, you're lacking in gameplay reasons to alter it, which are the important ones.
Westernization was already basically useless for Ming if you had already caught up in tech, since Westernizing doesn't give you western units anymore. Now that tech has been nerfed I guess it's useful again... lol.
Some of the Native Americans, arguably. Look up the "Five Civilized Tribes" as an example: complete with newspapers, written constitution, Christianity and plantation slavery.
Westernisation is immensely useful for Ming as a way of overthrowing those awful Celestial Empire/Inward Perfection/Mandate of Heaven mechanics. That was true even in 1.7.
Yeah i agree with the OP. westernization, and how the units work now, has straight up had down syndrome for like 4, 5 patches at least.
ANYONE that says westernization or unit pips or whatever ETC, works fine,
just really loves to have the Big Paradox deep in their throat,
and by that i mean that they always talking about how much they love the big P + Sweden in and around their mouths.
I say this only because i respect everyone and insult no one.
Funny thing about Russia is that they are pretty hard to westernize with unless you intentionally try for it, because they actually get a few tech bonuses from national ideas and unique events.
This is actually a 1.6 or 1.7 game, but I don't think its been changed since then.
This is actually a 1.6 or 1.7 game, but I don't think its been changed since then.
Support admistrive/diplomatic/military development:
The supported country will use the supporting country's tech group modifier instead of its own for the field that is supported, additionaliy the supported country will be considered a neighbour to the supporting country in the supported field, if suficent advanced this also allows modernising to supporting country's tech group in that field, permanentat allowing the country to advance its technology in that field with the same ease as the supporting country.
Example 1: Spain supports Aztec military development, Aztec will now pay for its military tech as a wstern nation allowing for rapid millitary development, also as Aztec start far behind in military tech it gets a big neighbour bonus from Spain even as they aren't neighbours.
Aztec still have to pay Messoamerican prices for diplomatic and admistrive technology.
Later Aztec gets so advanced in military technology that it chose to modernise it to western tech, however it is still in the Messoamerican tech group for diplomacy and admistrive technology.
The supported country will use the supporting country's tech group modifier instead of its own for the field that is supported, additionaliy the supported country will be considered a neighbour to the supporting country in the supported field, if suficent advanced this also allows modernising to supporting country's tech group in that field, permanentat allowing the country to advance its technology in that field with the same ease as the supporting country.
Example 1: Spain supports Aztec military development, Aztec will now pay for its military tech as a wstern nation allowing for rapid millitary development, also as Aztec start far behind in military tech it gets a big neighbour bonus from Spain even as they aren't neighbours.
Aztec still have to pay Messoamerican prices for diplomatic and admistrive technology.
Later Aztec gets so advanced in military technology that it chose to modernise it to western tech, however it is still in the Messoamerican tech group for diplomacy and admistrive technology.
I like this idea very much!
However, I've been working on a mod - foremost for myself - that brings a system which reenables western unit types for other nations.
So far, it's only posible to do so for Qing, Commonwealth and Hindustan.
It works this way: After westernizing, each country gets a specific decision "Westernize the army!" to change their unit types.
It is not meant to be easy, however. As for Qing, they'd need to fully defeat Ming first, they need 500 MIL power, 10k ducats and a stability of 3.
If there is interest, I'd put the mod on steam for you guys.
Westernisation should only be possible as either a special event for Russia and the Ottomans, or as a vassal as a Western power. It is absurd to suggest that ROTW nations had the capacity or willpower to spontaniously Westernise at any point during the game's time period.
Japan westernized a few decades after EU4 time. Qing followed with a weaker westernization attempt which ended with the victory of conservatives. Although the Japan westernization thing is out of scope, it is one of the events the westernization mechanism is designed after...
ROTW nations did have the willpower to westernize, when they see and realize the difference.
I'd like to see a mechanism that somehow made Russia westernization easy, Japan westernization much harder, and China westernization even harder. The current formulas involving the tech difference and basetax actually looks like a good start, albeit needing more tweaking.
Interesting, didnt know that. Though one could complain that they dont westernized voluntary but only to survive.
But as you said: It's out of timeframe.
I think one of the main problems with "Westernization" in EU4 is that it represents a society-wide series of reforms to bring your nation up to date with Western powers, such as what Russia and Japan did, which did indeed not really take place within the EU4 timeframe, but that there is no way to simulate nations simply modernizing their military equipment to make their armies fight just as well as European ones, which happened an awful lot.
Since in EU4 there is no way to do the latter without doing the former, I'd prefer the relative ease of Westernization to remain as it is for now. It's still probably not worth it for Muslim, Ottoman, or Eastern tech groups.
Since in EU4 there is no way to do the latter without doing the former, I'd prefer the relative ease of Westernization to remain as it is for now. It's still probably not worth it for Muslim, Ottoman, or Eastern tech groups.
You know what else is absurd? The notion that a RotW blob with as many resources as a standard European nation is fixed to tech at a worse rate. Even something nonsensical like Ming kicking England out of the British Isles still leaves Ming teching slower than England, even if England only owns some island out in the ocean somewhere.
Western cultures do dominate the world, otherwise people would flock to India and mainland Asia in their millions. This is not up for discussion, this is fact.
Because shortly after game start the Portuguese will begin exploring the world, sending the Great Divergence into full swing and separating the West from the rest of the world. Europa Universalis is called such because it is a game about playing the Great Divergence and it's impact on the world, like Crusader Kings primarily focuses on the holy wars which saw Christianity conquer outwards- there is no place in Crusader Kings for Saladin and Richard to decide they want to talk their differences out and make the "Abrahamic civilization which also tolerates non-Abrahamic faiths where everyone is friends hooray"- Saladin and Richard will only settle their conflicts in honorable combat on the battlefield. Likewise there is no reason for Europa Universalis to be as random as to sometimes have Japan discover the West Coast of the Americas and name it "big eastern land" in Japanese with Asian powers dominating the world while Europe continues to chug along getting nothing done.
Westernization in game exists for the sake of Russia, a non-Western country which Westernized in the reign of Peter the Great. If AI countries are Westernizing en mas in India then that is a problem.
Last edited:
It is absurd to compare what happens in-game to historical examples (which improved tech when they westernized) and only single out one unrealistic mechanic in a sea of them, and only when you don't like it.
Considering that the entire process functionally freezes your technological progress, no. It does not.
IMHO you tend to ignore the real difference between Europe and the rest of the world. Just try to read a little more history. For example - janissaries were quite advanced for the era. Ottomans had real big guns for a real need - theodosian walls. They had the military and administrative power to build them. No any other european country had that in 1453. Yet, 150 years later the ottos are just at the gates of Viena. Why they didn't go on conquering spree after the fall of Constantinople? Think in terms of manpower. To build up an army required them all the spring and a big part of summer. If they couldn't get early on at the Danube...then they could siege a city or two but ... nothing else. That is attrition in term of games.
How western countries bypassed that? Smaller armies. Semiprofessional ones. That was the big difference in the XV century. While janissaries were the core of ottoman army they were a small part of the 100 thousand huge army...After the failure of feudal levy in HYW France learned (the hard way) to maintain a semi professional army (gendarmes anyone - payed professionals?). Therefore a smaller but a better army was able to withstand more destruction than a non-professional one. if you have doubts just look how ranks of europeans stood in line and shot each other with lead balls. An attitude which lasted through the WWI. Europeans just stood there, resilient. Non-europeans just...got smarter and fled. These lead to the other side of european advantage. Firearms and cannons. Longbows and crossbows were better than any late medieval firearm. But the first needed practice and training. Later one were more easy to learn (just learn to load it and point it ahead ... ok, drill makes it better ..but that needs some days or weeks against TEN years for a longbowman). So kings were able to afford cannons, firearms and a professional standing army. Which coud really stand in a battle.
That is concerning the military aspect. There are more details but...
The other big focus in Europe was the stalemate between countries in the end of HYW. Quite like the the crusades...where would go the second sons when there are no lands in France, Germany or England? On a conquering spree in places like Sicily, Outremer and so on. Or Reconquista. But after the 1450...even that was stopped. Kings become powerful enough so you can't do it. Ottos keep a firm hand on outremer (so crusades aren't an option). So..go west . Err...go east.. to bountiful trade.
So, as an european you got these bonuses - a veteran status, a desperation to get rich, a very crowded continent (an agricultural revolution happened in Europe and the depopulation of the big plague just waned away - plus a richer middle strata!) so a manpool quite big. That is why a 400 man with a Cortes as leader was able to do a trick like conquering a 20 million empire (that and measles, of course! - the other big help for american colonisation!). They knew the size of aztecs but with Tlaxcala help and using european tactics as a spearhead they could outgun the aztecs (ok, a lot of luck). But if that doesn't convince you just look how Clive brought India in Great Britain's sphere. With some europeans and some locals trained. While I do not question individual courage of indians...they lacked the cohesion given by the european drilling (similar to phalanx training - you really depend on others - if they run you are toast). Tackling a real good administrative empire was hard until modern era. That is why eurpeans never ever tried to conquer China. Or Japan. They were competent ruled and highly organised. Capable to understand where european tactics gain and where failed. That is why nor Ottomans or China need to bother about westernization in XV-XVI century. They were better.
The innovative aspect of Europe of 1450 and later is just a byproduct of some factors - no empire who can bring uniformity, stalemate like westphalian peace or end of HYW, quite free circulation of ideas, printing, some incentive from byzantine refugees, etc. If your neighbor got a caravelle while you are stuck with a cog it is important to steal that design..and try to make it better. Just for a little edge. So you got a galleon. That wouldn't happen in China where by numbers you just stomp any upstart. Or in meso-america where you have to learn that wheels exists. Or in the jungles of Africa where population is sparse. It could happen in India or Middle East...if there are no big empires like ottos or mughals. They do not need a little edge, a continuing tinkering on design just to get an edge. But that was fundamental to a european country with a manpower and same technological level as its neighbour.
Therefore innovation appears because it is sought it and needed it. And there is what we call today...fundamental research. Science for the sake of science. Galilei, for instance, throwing things from a tower. What would that do to firearms? Nothing. But that would lead to Newton and bypassing empirical research of antiquity into modern science - applied one. When you ask a researcher - give me a watch able to stay precise two years at sea - and stay ahead of all competitors because my fleet is able to navigate with more precision. Here is where any other culture failed.
Now back onto game. Westernisation was hard. Petrine one was done just because he had absolute power, an army that obeyed him and a system to educate new generations. He saw the necessity because he was beaten soundly by western powers and the ottos! And the revolts he got were for loosing privileges (streltsy or boyars) or menacing a lifestyle (russian orthodoxy). A surviving byzantine empire would be westernised by default (they inherited the roman principle of adopting quick any technological advance). Poland failed to westernise because they couldn't have enough centralisation. Lacking the golden triplet - cannons, muskets, payed army - they failed not in the innovative way (Copernicus anyone?) but in applied part. When Japan adopted some western ideas was only when they needed an edge in internal fight. Once they got the shogunate on the run...they just shot down. No competition, no need for fancy ideas...
So - adopting western troops could and should be quite easy for a civilised nation (capable to produce firearms, imposing a standing payed army and in dire need to have an edge - Japan did it in 1600!). Adopting the innovative part should be harder. That is why the old sliders were much better (innovative and centralised, bordering a western country, etc). On the par side once you westernise you shoud get at the same tech level quite quick (european councillors, western type universities, etc). Shouldn't matter religion too much. But imperial status or obvious dominance of a zone (like China or Mughals) should give you a negative bonus.
Yes, I think that westernisation should be renamed - innovative, you could adopt western type army if you are civilized (centralised and the needed manpower). The westernisation would be harder but the bonuses should be higher. Like Russia fielding a modern type army in just one generation. And yes, europeans should get a bonus only if there no big blob in Europe.
LE - sorry about posting a wall...just got carried by the wave... I am used to blog...
How western countries bypassed that? Smaller armies. Semiprofessional ones. That was the big difference in the XV century. While janissaries were the core of ottoman army they were a small part of the 100 thousand huge army...After the failure of feudal levy in HYW France learned (the hard way) to maintain a semi professional army (gendarmes anyone - payed professionals?). Therefore a smaller but a better army was able to withstand more destruction than a non-professional one. if you have doubts just look how ranks of europeans stood in line and shot each other with lead balls. An attitude which lasted through the WWI. Europeans just stood there, resilient. Non-europeans just...got smarter and fled. These lead to the other side of european advantage. Firearms and cannons. Longbows and crossbows were better than any late medieval firearm. But the first needed practice and training. Later one were more easy to learn (just learn to load it and point it ahead ... ok, drill makes it better ..but that needs some days or weeks against TEN years for a longbowman). So kings were able to afford cannons, firearms and a professional standing army. Which coud really stand in a battle.
That is concerning the military aspect. There are more details but...
The other big focus in Europe was the stalemate between countries in the end of HYW. Quite like the the crusades...where would go the second sons when there are no lands in France, Germany or England? On a conquering spree in places like Sicily, Outremer and so on. Or Reconquista. But after the 1450...even that was stopped. Kings become powerful enough so you can't do it. Ottos keep a firm hand on outremer (so crusades aren't an option). So..go west . Err...go east.. to bountiful trade.
So, as an european you got these bonuses - a veteran status, a desperation to get rich, a very crowded continent (an agricultural revolution happened in Europe and the depopulation of the big plague just waned away - plus a richer middle strata!) so a manpool quite big. That is why a 400 man with a Cortes as leader was able to do a trick like conquering a 20 million empire (that and measles, of course! - the other big help for american colonisation!). They knew the size of aztecs but with Tlaxcala help and using european tactics as a spearhead they could outgun the aztecs (ok, a lot of luck). But if that doesn't convince you just look how Clive brought India in Great Britain's sphere. With some europeans and some locals trained. While I do not question individual courage of indians...they lacked the cohesion given by the european drilling (similar to phalanx training - you really depend on others - if they run you are toast). Tackling a real good administrative empire was hard until modern era. That is why eurpeans never ever tried to conquer China. Or Japan. They were competent ruled and highly organised. Capable to understand where european tactics gain and where failed. That is why nor Ottomans or China need to bother about westernization in XV-XVI century. They were better.
The innovative aspect of Europe of 1450 and later is just a byproduct of some factors - no empire who can bring uniformity, stalemate like westphalian peace or end of HYW, quite free circulation of ideas, printing, some incentive from byzantine refugees, etc. If your neighbor got a caravelle while you are stuck with a cog it is important to steal that design..and try to make it better. Just for a little edge. So you got a galleon. That wouldn't happen in China where by numbers you just stomp any upstart. Or in meso-america where you have to learn that wheels exists. Or in the jungles of Africa where population is sparse. It could happen in India or Middle East...if there are no big empires like ottos or mughals. They do not need a little edge, a continuing tinkering on design just to get an edge. But that was fundamental to a european country with a manpower and same technological level as its neighbour.
Therefore innovation appears because it is sought it and needed it. And there is what we call today...fundamental research. Science for the sake of science. Galilei, for instance, throwing things from a tower. What would that do to firearms? Nothing. But that would lead to Newton and bypassing empirical research of antiquity into modern science - applied one. When you ask a researcher - give me a watch able to stay precise two years at sea - and stay ahead of all competitors because my fleet is able to navigate with more precision. Here is where any other culture failed.
Now back onto game. Westernisation was hard. Petrine one was done just because he had absolute power, an army that obeyed him and a system to educate new generations. He saw the necessity because he was beaten soundly by western powers and the ottos! And the revolts he got were for loosing privileges (streltsy or boyars) or menacing a lifestyle (russian orthodoxy). A surviving byzantine empire would be westernised by default (they inherited the roman principle of adopting quick any technological advance). Poland failed to westernise because they couldn't have enough centralisation. Lacking the golden triplet - cannons, muskets, payed army - they failed not in the innovative way (Copernicus anyone?) but in applied part. When Japan adopted some western ideas was only when they needed an edge in internal fight. Once they got the shogunate on the run...they just shot down. No competition, no need for fancy ideas...
So - adopting western troops could and should be quite easy for a civilised nation (capable to produce firearms, imposing a standing payed army and in dire need to have an edge - Japan did it in 1600!). Adopting the innovative part should be harder. That is why the old sliders were much better (innovative and centralised, bordering a western country, etc). On the par side once you westernise you shoud get at the same tech level quite quick (european councillors, western type universities, etc). Shouldn't matter religion too much. But imperial status or obvious dominance of a zone (like China or Mughals) should give you a negative bonus.
Yes, I think that westernisation should be renamed - innovative, you could adopt western type army if you are civilized (centralised and the needed manpower). The westernisation would be harder but the bonuses should be higher. Like Russia fielding a modern type army in just one generation. And yes, europeans should get a bonus only if there no big blob in Europe.
LE - sorry about posting a wall...just got carried by the wave... I am used to blog...
Last edited:
God damn it! Use paragraphs! No one is going to read this unless you break it up much better with some blank spaces.