What would YOU like to see in Europa Universalis IV?
- Thread starter Jia Xu
- 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.
Don't make it deterministic. If I want to play a railroaded game I'll go play a shooter.
Leave it up to the modding scene to make more specific, deterministic versions of the game. Add as much properly working features, add as much depth as possible, limit the bugs and leave it there.
Adding country specific flavor is fine. Forcing an invasion of Italy by France, even though the latter is already embroiled in multiple wars, just because it's 1796-97 makes me really not want to play.
Leave it up to the modding scene to make more specific, deterministic versions of the game. Add as much properly working features, add as much depth as possible, limit the bugs and leave it there.
Adding country specific flavor is fine. Forcing an invasion of Italy by France, even though the latter is already embroiled in multiple wars, just because it's 1796-97 makes me really not want to play.
I think we will be ok, from the description of how historical events will work it sounds like it will be similar to EU III but much more refined to account for specific variables like time period, ruler, culture, power...ect.
So you won't be forced down a specific path, but you will find your "options" ( think decisions in EU III but for everything ) limited depending on your particular situation.
I wouldn't be surprised to see things like, you get a monarch with a solid military rating in 1500 as France and you have poor relations with Austria....as a result an event chain fires/decision opens up prompting/allowing you to invade Italy with certain particular perks for doing so. Select leaders from the actual struggle will become available, events specific to the actual historical campaign will fire so long as it is active.
It's just a guess, but I think it is a long the lines of how Paradox is going to wed the open sandbox of EU III to some of the determinism found in EU 2.
PI MUST make Majapahit as the power it was, or me and my royal guard will go to their HQ and stab the entire team with Keris daggers!
Oh, and probably be able to establish single-city trading posts. Also, make a system to exploit small powers fighting each other and arms-for-land, for example in Africa and Indonesia
Oh, and probably be able to establish single-city trading posts. Also, make a system to exploit small powers fighting each other and arms-for-land, for example in Africa and Indonesia
Well, it seems that PI adressed most of my main points of interest, ebb and flow, new diplomatics ( coalitions ftw! ) and a touch of leader characterization.
Only thing left I can think of is flavours. I prefer to play outside Europe and I oftened found some flavour/events/subsystems lacking in Asia, Indian continent and SE Asia specifically. I hope there will be greater focus on the world outside Europe, be they events or subsystems ( optimally both ). And since trade seems to get an upgrade I hope the colonization will see some kind of upgrade too. A bit more interaction with the local cultures and subjugated exotic countries and their neighbours would be welcome. Some kind of specific casus belli for colonial war could be interesting as well.
Only thing left I can think of is flavours. I prefer to play outside Europe and I oftened found some flavour/events/subsystems lacking in Asia, Indian continent and SE Asia specifically. I hope there will be greater focus on the world outside Europe, be they events or subsystems ( optimally both ). And since trade seems to get an upgrade I hope the colonization will see some kind of upgrade too. A bit more interaction with the local cultures and subjugated exotic countries and their neighbours would be welcome. Some kind of specific casus belli for colonial war could be interesting as well.
A simplified ‘arcade mode’ with less complex mechanics and easier conquest might help attract / satisfy newcomers. Then it becomes easier to justify adding deeper difficulty to the main game:
My issues with EUIII were that it was too sandboxy, too easy to pull ridiculous world conquests, and got too dull and lifeless too quickly as a result. Hardly anybody played their games past the first 150 years.
To keep it fresher and more challenging for longer, I would suggest a ‘Balance of Power’ mechanic, similar to the great powers and spheres of influence of Victoria.
The balance of power was a big deal for the diplomats of Europe, and if anyone got too powerful a coalition would inevitably form against them, even across religious divides. This happened numerous times in history, and if implemented in-game would stop a human player running away with the game (and getting bored in the process). They would have to use more thought / strategy in their expansion.
To compensate for these restrictions to physical expansion, an influence system would give a way of expanding power indirectly. E.g. the historical contest between England and France for having a controlling influence in Scotland, which ultimately led to the formation of the UK (in fact most of the great powers of the period were formed by politics, not conquest).
I would argue that in some ways the balance of power was more important than religion, and yet it is absent from the game. And without it, there will be endless (and dull) world conquests by Navarra et al. (I am hoping the coalitions mentioned by the devs represent thinking along thse lines, but we will have to see...)
My issues with EUIII were that it was too sandboxy, too easy to pull ridiculous world conquests, and got too dull and lifeless too quickly as a result. Hardly anybody played their games past the first 150 years.
To keep it fresher and more challenging for longer, I would suggest a ‘Balance of Power’ mechanic, similar to the great powers and spheres of influence of Victoria.
The balance of power was a big deal for the diplomats of Europe, and if anyone got too powerful a coalition would inevitably form against them, even across religious divides. This happened numerous times in history, and if implemented in-game would stop a human player running away with the game (and getting bored in the process). They would have to use more thought / strategy in their expansion.
To compensate for these restrictions to physical expansion, an influence system would give a way of expanding power indirectly. E.g. the historical contest between England and France for having a controlling influence in Scotland, which ultimately led to the formation of the UK (in fact most of the great powers of the period were formed by politics, not conquest).
I would argue that in some ways the balance of power was more important than religion, and yet it is absent from the game. And without it, there will be endless (and dull) world conquests by Navarra et al. (I am hoping the coalitions mentioned by the devs represent thinking along thse lines, but we will have to see...)
Maybe cavalary unit on map? You know, in EU III we can see only land unit on map. In HoI III we can see cavalry, tank and land units.
Balance of power... I love to kill it. When you kill balance of power, the new balance appears. And fun happens.
This!I think this is the best thing ever in the game regarding things that developers didn't really put as a mechanism but exists as a general rule
I like all of these ideas, but yet i imagine they will never come to fruition - i just havea gut feeling EUIV is going to dissapoint me in many regards
but i look forward to seeing the Dev diaries.
What I would like to see is a rehaul of technology research and inflation.
There was nothing logical about nations having research bugdets at the time. The Tudors didn't have paid scientists trying to develop their technology. Technologies spread usually without any government interference. Usually technology and ideas spread through trade.
What I would like to see is that tech dicoveries would be random with higher chances going into areas that support environments conducive to research (think Italy in the renaissance) by either building universities and or having your slider over to "open mindedness" over "closed mindedness". Then after the tech level is dicovered your trade partners have a MTTH to also gain your tech level.
While we're at it, I also say that inflation needs to be rehauled. Simply minting should not increase inflation as its sitting in your bank no moving. Spending money that you minted should increase inflation. At the same time, inflation should not hamper your tech growth rates but rather your stability. Too much inflation and the higher prices your citizens face would decrease stability and raise revolt risk. That of course would create an evironment not conducive to trade and research.
That's how I would do it.
There was nothing logical about nations having research bugdets at the time. The Tudors didn't have paid scientists trying to develop their technology. Technologies spread usually without any government interference. Usually technology and ideas spread through trade.
What I would like to see is that tech dicoveries would be random with higher chances going into areas that support environments conducive to research (think Italy in the renaissance) by either building universities and or having your slider over to "open mindedness" over "closed mindedness". Then after the tech level is dicovered your trade partners have a MTTH to also gain your tech level.
While we're at it, I also say that inflation needs to be rehauled. Simply minting should not increase inflation as its sitting in your bank no moving. Spending money that you minted should increase inflation. At the same time, inflation should not hamper your tech growth rates but rather your stability. Too much inflation and the higher prices your citizens face would decrease stability and raise revolt risk. That of course would create an evironment not conducive to trade and research.
That's how I would do it.
I believe that what you're asking for might be way too much for the game and it wuldn't be realistic anyway since both research and inflation in the period did not work the way they do now (for one thing - many nations did not issue their own money, while the amount of silver and gold available played a big role in price fluctuations - to create a proper model for such a system would be a chore in itself without even transplanting it into the game and it would end up mostly incomprehensible for the players).
I posted some stuff here, I'm going to add a few more ideas and complete my suggestion list:
1) No more global badboy but cultural/religious badboy. No more badboy from Spain for Ming declaring war on Persia but massive badboy from Persian cultures + badboy from Muslim countries.
2) The ability to demand tribute without going to war. As a powerhouse I should be able to demand tributes from neighbouring countries. Refusing tributes results in broken relations + CB which doesnt cost stability but maybe twice or triple the badboy IN THE TARGET'S CULTURE SPHERE/RELIGIOUS SPHERE. Them accepting the tribute should also give badboy (maybe half the amount you'd get if it was accepted).
3) The possibility to have more than 1 religion in a country. Use %s instead. Same for population
4) Connected to 3): The ability to use missionaries outside your own borders! This opens a new metagame where countries war each other on religious level by invading each others border provinces with missionaries. If stayed uncontested the province will slowly defect to the new religion.
5) No more technology groups. Start with 1. Instead give all countries a unique "tech tree". For example not every country gets a new unit at lvl x. Some have to do further research. Also do some countries start with advanced levels. At game start for example Europe could get a higher initial trade level than say Mesoamerican countries.
6) Overhauled military: Battles start at half the way to target province and get fiercer every day you move on. On the final day (the day it takes to reach province b from A) the main battle is being fought with a final outcome at the end of the day.
7) More dedication to historically important nations like Ottomans. In fact European gameplay, especially Easter European gameplay should be focussed on holding of the Ottomans by doing decent politics inside Europe and unite against them.
8) Some better horde mechanism. Don't use the one from DW or I will not buy it. This is the first thing I will check when the game comes out.
9) Economy overhaul: I always found it funny that huge countries have to pay amounts like 50 or 60 for constructions. Also their yearly income was unrealistic. Increase the yearly income, but also give more possibilities to spend money. EXAMPLE read 10)
10) Spies, Merchants, Missionairies, Diplomants cost money! You can send as many as you want as long as you got the spare money for them. Of course the gravity of some of their actions has to be reduced (spies for example) but if a country choses to fully go for covert operations then it should be able to spend all its money on agents and cause havoc at neighbouring countries.
Same for missionary wars (4)). A country can send as many missionaries as they want as long as they have enough money to maintain them. Each missionary should take a certain amount per month like all other agent types.
1) No more global badboy but cultural/religious badboy. No more badboy from Spain for Ming declaring war on Persia but massive badboy from Persian cultures + badboy from Muslim countries.
2) The ability to demand tribute without going to war. As a powerhouse I should be able to demand tributes from neighbouring countries. Refusing tributes results in broken relations + CB which doesnt cost stability but maybe twice or triple the badboy IN THE TARGET'S CULTURE SPHERE/RELIGIOUS SPHERE. Them accepting the tribute should also give badboy (maybe half the amount you'd get if it was accepted).
3) The possibility to have more than 1 religion in a country. Use %s instead. Same for population
4) Connected to 3): The ability to use missionaries outside your own borders! This opens a new metagame where countries war each other on religious level by invading each others border provinces with missionaries. If stayed uncontested the province will slowly defect to the new religion.
5) No more technology groups. Start with 1. Instead give all countries a unique "tech tree". For example not every country gets a new unit at lvl x. Some have to do further research. Also do some countries start with advanced levels. At game start for example Europe could get a higher initial trade level than say Mesoamerican countries.
6) Overhauled military: Battles start at half the way to target province and get fiercer every day you move on. On the final day (the day it takes to reach province b from A) the main battle is being fought with a final outcome at the end of the day.
7) More dedication to historically important nations like Ottomans. In fact European gameplay, especially Easter European gameplay should be focussed on holding of the Ottomans by doing decent politics inside Europe and unite against them.
8) Some better horde mechanism. Don't use the one from DW or I will not buy it. This is the first thing I will check when the game comes out.
9) Economy overhaul: I always found it funny that huge countries have to pay amounts like 50 or 60 for constructions. Also their yearly income was unrealistic. Increase the yearly income, but also give more possibilities to spend money. EXAMPLE read 10)
10) Spies, Merchants, Missionairies, Diplomants cost money! You can send as many as you want as long as you got the spare money for them. Of course the gravity of some of their actions has to be reduced (spies for example) but if a country choses to fully go for covert operations then it should be able to spend all its money on agents and cause havoc at neighbouring countries.
Same for missionary wars (4)). A country can send as many missionaries as they want as long as they have enough money to maintain them. Each missionary should take a certain amount per month like all other agent types.
Last edited:
Sounds a bit over complicated for... well, nothing. It also dramatically removes the transparency the player has understanding where techs are. There is nothing wrong with not telling the player everything, but obscuring information for the sake of doing so seems wrong. I like to know whether my neighbours have the same units available as I do. So a technology overlay in CK2 would be nice, where the highest level in a tech is coloured green, and then each lower level is coloured a shading all the way to red.
Hrm... It might be too complicated, but what if they added Vic2 Pops and world trade to EU4. Then you could create a world demand and supply and have gold inflation when the new world is discovered.
Now it might be unrealistic to be able to see your pop information like a census, but it would be quite interesting to have such information be calculated behind the scenes. By Vic2 existing it shows that it can be done, but whether or not they want to do it in EU4 is yet to be seen though.
LESS/NO PEASANT REVOLTS. Give us something else to worry about when not fighting wars besides peasant revolts. The most annoying and unfun part of the game. Revolts should be meaningful, with real characters and political consequences behind them. Seeing that you got a revolt because of a .5% chance slider seems to punish the player for no reason. Even when there's a legitimate reason for a revolt, quashing them is no fun. If you decide to keep them, at least give us a police force in later years, so the AI can deal with it.
Customizable nations. Get really big as Genoa? Change your name, look, etc. Become a Republican Dictatorship as the Teutonic Knights? You should be able to make changes to the visual descriptor of your nation that feel like the world is changing and evolving. Let us customize the flag with an easy to use system, ala the CKII insignia generator. Be the Alsacian Empire if you want, not just the drab plain yellow forever. The worst thing in terms of customisation in any Paradox game is that the highest level of achievement comes in the form of becoming some premade empire (IE, the physical HRE, Russia, etc)
Level editor. Place nations and provinces where you want with a single click or drag. This'll streamline modding and even pardox's in-house creation. Most games have a simple level editor, especially strategy games. Its almost expected. Maybe you could outsource the work on a level designer.
More advanced political systems, elections, college of cardinals, etc. Using the vassals and realms systems of CKII would make internal politics more meaningful.
More character focus. The CKII social system would work in any era, just spruce it up. People were and are important throughout history. This ambigous focus on the nation just doesn't make much sense. Also, characters having traits means you can have a real reason for the AI to not all act the same.
More attention to the mid/endgame As current in CK2 and EU3, you'll be getting just about the same thing in 1399 as you are in 1699. Focus on cosmetic and gameplay changes that make you feel as if the time periods are really changing. Many people, including myself, seem to quit about 1620 because the game seems like the same old thing.
Inter-provincial tribes. Governments with tribal elements have tribal infighting in provinces. They conquer eachother, strangle your manpower, get other nations annoyed at you via raids, etc. Maybe they can scale from the CKII equivalent of baronies to duchies.
More internal focus. Have the ability to spend most of your time worrying about internal matters, no matter how small you are. Give us something to do with our hands when not in a war.
Customizable nations. Get really big as Genoa? Change your name, look, etc. Become a Republican Dictatorship as the Teutonic Knights? You should be able to make changes to the visual descriptor of your nation that feel like the world is changing and evolving. Let us customize the flag with an easy to use system, ala the CKII insignia generator. Be the Alsacian Empire if you want, not just the drab plain yellow forever. The worst thing in terms of customisation in any Paradox game is that the highest level of achievement comes in the form of becoming some premade empire (IE, the physical HRE, Russia, etc)
Level editor. Place nations and provinces where you want with a single click or drag. This'll streamline modding and even pardox's in-house creation. Most games have a simple level editor, especially strategy games. Its almost expected. Maybe you could outsource the work on a level designer.
More advanced political systems, elections, college of cardinals, etc. Using the vassals and realms systems of CKII would make internal politics more meaningful.
More character focus. The CKII social system would work in any era, just spruce it up. People were and are important throughout history. This ambigous focus on the nation just doesn't make much sense. Also, characters having traits means you can have a real reason for the AI to not all act the same.
More attention to the mid/endgame As current in CK2 and EU3, you'll be getting just about the same thing in 1399 as you are in 1699. Focus on cosmetic and gameplay changes that make you feel as if the time periods are really changing. Many people, including myself, seem to quit about 1620 because the game seems like the same old thing.
Inter-provincial tribes. Governments with tribal elements have tribal infighting in provinces. They conquer eachother, strangle your manpower, get other nations annoyed at you via raids, etc. Maybe they can scale from the CKII equivalent of baronies to duchies.
More internal focus. Have the ability to spend most of your time worrying about internal matters, no matter how small you are. Give us something to do with our hands when not in a war.
Last edited:
This would be good, although with DW you can currently set armies to hunt rebels. It is a little strange sometimes with the choice of which armies to send.
A good idea. It might require save and reload to access though, as otherwise it could hold up games.
Bad idea. There is little "simple" about placing provinces and nations. Making it easier for mods is one thing. Having a level editor that lets you drag nations and provinces around would require it to be able to reshape them without leaving any dead pixels, check and change adjacencies and straits, rewrite all the distance calculations and so forth. You'd also need it to be able to sort out terrain with the newly adjacent provinces.
So, the same depth as the CKII social system. Just spread over 300 countries, 1700+ provinces, with the attendant spouses, brothers, sisters, sons, daughters, uncles, aunts and random hangers on. As well as all the plots and intrigues that this causes, and tracking the relations between all of them, in both directions...
That depends on who you are playing. By 1699 I'm often up to my elbows in colonial wars, or putting down the last of the reformation problems I've been having.
I've also got the potential of colonial revolts.
What sort of cosmetic and gameplay changes would you want, considering it would have to change smoothly, otherwise you're writing more than one game.
That'll make playing tribes fun... Perhaps you'd like to make it so you've got absolutely no control over anything beyond your king (or president)'s immediate reach?
Building, trade, diplomacy. All things you can do when not at war. I will admit sometimes there's not a lot you can do, especially as someone like Cherokee, but if you want less revolts you're cutting down on one of the between war things to do. What sort of things would you suggest you could do, without turning the game into a micromanagement hell, and without interfering in your ability to concentrate on a war when one happens?
Peasant revolts are least importance, actualy i like peasant revolts, they give free free subjects slider move. Plus they are easy to quell.
Well how about just when TO changes goverment, it becomes prussia automaticaly? This could be merged with dynamic flags.