• 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.

taltamir

Major
14 Badges
Sep 27, 2009
618
428
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Magicka
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Crusader Kings II
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Age of Wonders III
The individual buildings are generally stronger than before. A 40% tax increase from a temple on a 10 development province is +4, on a 3 development province (the minimum AFAIK), it's slightly over +1 tax increase...
no, this is wrong.
10 development means a sum total of tax, manpower, and production is 10. 3 development (minimum possible development) means tax, manpower, and production add up to 3. A 3 development province will always have 1 tax, 1 manpower, 1 production.
A 10 dev province has between 1 and 8 tax.
So, a temple gives between 0.4 and 3.2 on a 10 dev province (which are rare)
On a 3 dev province it will always give 0.4, which is a significant step down from pre 1.12 temple which gave a flat 1. And note that before we actually had twice as many building and they did combine both flat and % bonuses. And buildings are far more expensive now.
Buildings simply took a huge massive nerf, this is somewhat mitigated, hypothetically, by the development system. If you get a 50 dev province to outproduce your best producing province pre 1.12, its because it has 50 development which compensates for buildings being worse, not because buildings are now better.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Mudcrab

Simurghian
34 Badges
Sep 20, 2009
1.100
647
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Supreme Ruler: Cold War
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Rome Gold
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • March of the Eagles
  • Cities in Motion
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • 500k Club
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
Interesting thread.

Common sense (3d models aside) for me, is a turd. I'm sorry to have to be graphic. Caution urged me not to buy after reading the bullet points, but like a fool I bought it so "Mea Culpa". But it's still a turd.

What I essentially bought was an expansion to "March of the Eagles" with this new atrocious fort 'mechanic'. I like March of the Eagles, it could've been the go-to PDX multiplayer game and this fort mechanic would have suited it well and might have enriched it.

The rest of the bullet points I never discovered for myself because I was soon reverting to the prior patch number 1.11.4 or whatever it is, in exasperation. My main issue is that I've logged 2200 hours in EU since launch, and I look at a typical "Common Sense" game and am unsure what is happening as I watch. In short, It appears I have to unlearn almost everything I learned about combat in this game in 2200 hours to succeed in a particular campaign. That onus on me, a previously loyal customer, to unlearn and re-learn is not why I spend time with EU4. Life is too bloody short.

PDS -don't similarly mess up "Horse Lords", I humbly beg you. And a bit of transparency with your customers wouldn't go amiss. Please reply to the concerns they raise in a timely manner.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

grommile

Field Marshal
66 Badges
Jun 4, 2011
22.453
38.874
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • March of the Eagles
  • Knights of Pen and Paper 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Prison Architect
What I essentially bought was an expansion to "March of the Eagles" with this new atrocious fort 'mechanic'.
Modulo the obvious bugs, I find the new fort mechanic entirely straightforward and manageable - but then, I always regarded the whole "carpet sieging" thing as a misfeature.

Admittedly, I've only played one game in 1.12, because I've run out of countries I want to play in Ironman (since I can no longer tolerate all the agency denial mechanics attached to monarchies).
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:

Maldazar

Galactic President Superstar McAwesomeville
89 Badges
Aug 25, 2014
579
1.167
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
Not, when the game, at least without CS, makes the difference stay the same throughout the campaign until 1821. That's completely ahistorical.
Actualy, no, it's not... Even the USA, who was probably the most developed of the countries of the new world by 1800, still had only around 10% of the population of England (no, that's not UK, but England alone..). So basicly, on global scale, they were still kind of irrelevant.. It's after this period, in the victorian era (so basicly 1836 onwards) that USA industrialized like crazy and became the superpower they are right now... It's just not historical at all that the Americas should develop in this timeframe... if you want a developed america/usa, go play victoria, that is they period. This is the period where Europe basicly ruled the world.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

IdiotsOpposite

Captain
54 Badges
Aug 15, 2013
450
1.288
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
Not, when the game, at least without CS, makes the difference stay the same throughout the campaign until 1821. That's completely ahistorical.

Talking about "without CS" in regard to balancing is rather irrelevant, considering Johan has, in this very thread, established a policy of balancing around the game with all DLC included, rather than the game with no DLC included. And with so many features being DLC now, that's probably for the best.
 
  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

BFTeixeira

Account removed at users request
17 Badges
Sep 14, 2014
1.343
985
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
Actualy, no, it's not... Even the USA, who was probably the most developed of the countries of the new world by 1800, still had only around 10% of the population of England (no, that's not UK, but England alone..). So basicly, on global scale, they were still kind of irrelevant.. It's after this period, in the victorian era (so basicly 1836 onwards) that USA industrialized like crazy and became the superpower they are right now... It's just not historical at all that the Americas should develop in this timeframe... if you want a developed america/usa, go play victoria, that is they period. This is the period where Europe basicly ruled the world.
Are you saying that the difference between europe and rotw was exactly the same between 1444 and 1821? Thats just not true.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

BFTeixeira

Account removed at users request
17 Badges
Sep 14, 2014
1.343
985
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
Talking about "without CS" in regard to balancing is rather irrelevant, considering Johan has, in this very thread, established a policy of balancing around the game with all DLC included, rather than the game with no DLC included. And with so many features being DLC now, that's probably for the best.
Thats another bad policy.
 
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:

radiatoren

First Lieutenant
18 Badges
Oct 9, 2014
251
127
  • Divine Wind
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • March of the Eagles
  • Majesty 2
  • Heir to the Throne
  • For The Glory
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
I don't want development. There, said it. I'm with the "too many monarch point sinks" people on this one, and want freedom to play without it. Thanks Paradox for making it optional.
Seriously: The old system had a lot of design flaws which the CS-system doesn't have to the same degree. I see the design as being superior, though needing further refinements in how it functions.

Where I see a serious problem is in the policies of Paradox: If you only have development and government ranks when you have the DLC, you are excluding a huge chunk of the core game from the people without the expansion which I find unfortunate, particularly when it comes to future design of DLCs and the more ethical side of "pay to win". The previous DLCs were mostly optional and less gamechanging features. I can see the reason for not wanting redesigned and somewhat unfinished features in the core game, But I don't like the use of the paid DLC as the cut-off. A beta patch is a much better option, a further division of content in making DLCs into content-packs with several DLC-toggles of which some are free or, by far the best option, you can make an ingame menu of game features you want to toggle on or off when the massive redesigns happen if that is the reason.

As for "too many monarch point sinks", I would be more inclined to further specify the needs. For diplomatic and administrative, you can always find something constructive to use it on, Ie: Coring, increasing stability, reducing inflation and reducing war exhaustion, peace deal brokering, annexing subjects or culture converting. Military points, on the other hand, could be wasted in the past since you usually run out of money for buildings before you run out of mil points, not always needed to beat down rebel factions and other sinks may be unavailable according to your choices. Where I see the problem is the classic money sink problem: You can now easier get to use your money on buildings, but over time a lot of the endvalue of the buildings are... More money! The monarch points you need to use for having buildings as moneysinks now starts at zero, but will explode as you need to develop provinces to unlock more building slots. In the end, the problem of too few money sinks compared to monarch point sinks is still in the game and it is part of the reason why development should not be the end of changes to the game. Development gives a further potential military point sink, which is good, but what is needed is a way to make money worth something other than more money or military might since military might rarely is the limiting factor compared to the diplomatic point and/or administrative point limited blobbing if you know how to handle the diplomatic game. Right now money is just a number, still, while monarch points are god, still. That is the problem of sinks: The games expansion mechanics (and therefore the absolutely most common goal of the game) is converging towards being only limited by monarch points as you blob, is the problem. How to fix that depends on the direction Paradox wants to take the game, but it may be a good idea to consider how to make other endgoals of the game more interesting or make money and what they can be used for, more effectual on the decission-making of the end-game.
 
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

Homusubi

Kampaku
23 Badges
Mar 4, 2014
960
880
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Surviving Mars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
We don't need more military point sinks. There are indeed far fewer mil sinks than admin or dip, but you get shafted to a much greater extent if you lag behind in mil tech than in admin and especially than in dip, as anyone who has tried playing Buryatia will testify.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Maldazar

Galactic President Superstar McAwesomeville
89 Badges
Aug 25, 2014
579
1.167
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
Are you saying that the difference between europe and rotw was exactly the same between 1444 and 1821? Thats just not true.
Not at all, what i'm saying is that the diferences were still huge... probably a lot bigger then you imagine. But i'm also quite sure that the diference (if you want to) can become A LOT smaller then they are at start.

Lets say that the avarage province in (western) europe has a development of 15, and that the avarage province in the americas has a starting development of 5. This means that on avarage europe is 3x more developed then the americas. Now, if you are playing americas and improve your province to lets say 10 development on average (you are playing kind of tall > large, else you would probably not be developing provinces at all), I very strongly doubt that the europeans are going to make their avarage 30 dev (to maintain a diference of 3x more developed), you actualy cut the diference down to only 1.5x more developed (so basicly halfed the amount europe is more developed then your country). Still realistic, were the americas are not getting at european levels, but you did still develop A LOT (doubling your average)... Anyway, you get the point. For the diference in development of the rest of the world towards europe to lower, the rest needs to develop a lot less then europe would need to develop to maintain their huge lead. So sure, at the end they will probably still be more developed, but on avarage it's less then at the start. (and some exceptions like China might actualy be getting close to europe standards, because they do have very high development as well at start)
 

BFTeixeira

Account removed at users request
17 Badges
Sep 14, 2014
1.343
985
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
Not at all, what i'm saying is that the diferences were still huge... probably a lot bigger then you imagine. But i'm also quite sure that the diference (if you want to) can become A LOT smaller then they are at start.

Lets say that the avarage province in (western) europe has a development of 15, and that the avarage province in the americas has a starting development of 5. This means that on avarage europe is 3x more developed then the americas. Now, if you are playing americas and improve your province to lets say 10 development on average (you are playing kind of tall > large, else you would probably not be developing provinces at all), I very strongly doubt that the europeans are going to make their avarage 30 dev (to maintain a diference of 3x more developed), you actualy cut the diference down to only 1.5x more developed (so basicly halfed the amount europe is more developed then your country). Still realistic, were the americas are not getting at european levels, but you did still develop A LOT (doubling your average)... Anyway, you get the point. For the diference in development of the rest of the world towards europe to lower, the rest needs to develop a lot less then europe would need to develop to maintain their huge lead. So sure, at the end they will probably still be more developed, but on avarage it's less then at the start. (and some exceptions like China might actualy be getting close to europe standards, because they do have very high development as well at start)
Statistically you can do whatever you want with numbers. In your example, you use a "how many times more developed is europe compared to rotw". And, in fact, from that perspective, you're absolutely correct. But, i'm not talking about the difference like you meant. Let's pick your example: an average dev 5 for rotw, and an average dev 15 for europe. That's 10 dev levels difference. If rotw improves 10 dev levels, europe only has to improve 10 to maintain the same 10 dev levels difference.
Now, i'm not saying that by 1800's there wasn't much of a difference between europe and rotw. Yes, europe was still very much more developed than rotw. But the difference was just not as much as in the mid 1400's.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Xdevo

Major
71 Badges
Apr 28, 2015
557
1.333
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • March of the Eagles
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Victoria 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Rome Gold
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
Actualy, no, it's not... Even the USA, who was probably the most developed of the countries of the new world by 1800, still had only around 10% of the population of England (no, that's not UK, but England alone..). So basicly, on global scale, they were still kind of irrelevant.. It's after this period, in the victorian era (so basicly 1836 onwards) that USA industrialized like crazy and became the superpower they are right now... It's just not historical at all that the Americas should develop in this timeframe... if you want a developed america/usa, go play victoria, that is they period. This is the period where Europe basicly ruled the world.

The US had 5.31 million people (I don't know if that stat includes slaves, natives, and/or the people who had begun to trade into the French territory) in their 1800 census. England had a population of 7.75 million in their 1801 census. The US would likely have only been 10% around 1700 excluding the number of natives.

The US had far more than 10% of the population of England in 1800. The US cities weren't as large or developed as London, but provinces like Lenape, Manhattan, Santee, Conoy, and Chesapeake (Philadelphia, New York, Charleston, Baltimore, and Norfolk) should really be ending up with greater development since those were major US cities in the very late game time frame and rivaled some of the secondary European cites.

Perhaps a better system would be to give global increases to development at certain technologies to represent the increasing ability to change landscape and better make use of space.
 
  • 2
Reactions:

WeissRaben

Gian Galeazzo Visconti #1 Fanboy.
95 Badges
Sep 29, 2008
6.949
5.461
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Magicka
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Semper Fi
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Victoria 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • 500k Club
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
The US had 5.31 million people (I don't know if that stat includes slaves, natives, and/or the people who had begun to trade into the French territory) in their 1800 census. England had a population of 7.75 million in their 1801 census. The US would likely have only been 10% around 1700 excluding the number of natives.

The US had far more than 10% of the population of England in 1800. The US cities weren't as large or developed as London, but provinces like Lenape, Manhattan, Santee, Conoy, and Chesapeake (Philadelphia, New York, Charleston, Baltimore, and Norfolk) should really be ending up with greater development since those were major US cities in the very late game time frame and rivaled some of the secondary European cites.

Perhaps a better system would be to give global increases to development at certain technologies to represent the increasing ability to change landscape and better make use of space.
I don't usually come down to these trivial terms, but the correct answer to this is "lolno". NYC was the biggest city in the US, as of 1821, and it topped at 150k inhabitants - three quarters of the inhabitants of Paris, but in 1444, because in 1821 it was more like 720k. Philadelphia had 62k, like Baltimore; Boston had 43k, Charleston had 24k, Norfolk was barely a town at 8.4k. Sorry, but you'll need another 30-40 years to see US cities as somewhat relevant, and even then it will probably be NYC, mostly.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Xdevo

Major
71 Badges
Apr 28, 2015
557
1.333
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • March of the Eagles
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Victoria 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Rome Gold
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
I don't usually come down to these trivial terms, but the correct answer to this is "lolno". NYC was the biggest city in the US, as of 1821, and it topped at 150k inhabitants - three quarters of the inhabitants of Paris, but in 1444. Philadelphia had 62k, like Baltimore; Boston had 43k, Charleston had 24k, Norfolk was barely a town at 8.4k. Sorry, but you'll need another 30-40 years to see US cities as somewhat relevant, and even then it will probably be NYC, mostly.

That's why I said 'secondary cities', obviously they wouldn't match up to London, Paris etc, but both NYC and Philly could have competed with Marseilles or the other second-tier cities of europe at the time, they shouldn't be 2-2-2 provinces in 1800.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

TheChronoMaster

King of the Underdogs
117 Badges
Feb 2, 2011
2.382
709
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Deus Vult
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • BATTLETECH
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Pride of Nations
  • 500k Club
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • BATTLETECH - Backer
  • BATTLETECH - Beta Backer
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Victoria 2
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Shadowrun Returns
Here's an idea, regarding that -- why not have 'colonization boom' events that can raise a colonial province's development? More likely if you have ideas that increase colony growth, but these events are for provinces belonging to a colonial nation.
 
  • 5
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

WeissRaben

Gian Galeazzo Visconti #1 Fanboy.
95 Badges
Sep 29, 2008
6.949
5.461
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Magicka
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Semper Fi
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Victoria 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • 500k Club
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
That's why I said 'secondary cities', obviously they wouldn't match up to London, Paris etc, but both NYC and Philly could have competed with Marseilles or the other second-tier cities of europe at the time, they shouldn't be 2-2-2 provinces in 1800.
New York might have, but not by a lot - Marseille had 140k inhabitants, back then, and there were a lot of cities in Europe around that size; in the US, on the other hand, there was a step 90k inhabitants tall between the biggest city and the second.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Xdevo

Major
71 Badges
Apr 28, 2015
557
1.333
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • March of the Eagles
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Victoria 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Rome Gold
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
New York might have, but not by a lot - Marseille had 140k inhabitants, back then, and there were a lot of cities in Europe around that size; in the US, on the other hand, there was a step 90k inhabitants tall between the biggest city and the second.

I'm not saying that they were larger or more important, just that they could compete. Again, obviously nothing in the Americas should reach the levels of like Paris, but the American cities were very far away from the backwaters that the game portrays them to be. The frontier being 2-2-1 makes sense, but not the core American cities. Even then, the 1800's America was producing large quantities of Tobacco and other goods (Jasmine, Rum).

Perhaps colonial nations could as part of the government receive a reduction in dev cost (that hopefully the AI would use to good effect), or maybe the ability to choose a focus for a colonial nation when it forms (trade, development, military, goods production, taxation) so that colonial nations are more useful to their overlord.

Also why is Connecticut the highest development in the US? One would think the non OPM native capitals or larger ports would have the most development.
 

Frederick_Will

Captain
Nov 26, 2014
322
277
I'm not saying that they were larger or more important, just that they could compete. Again, obviously nothing in the Americas should reach the levels of like Paris, but the American cities were very far away from the backwaters that the game portrays them to be. The frontier being 2-2-1 makes sense, but not the core American cities. Even then, the 1800's America was producing large quantities of Tobacco and other goods (Jasmine, Rum).

Perhaps colonial nations could as part of the government receive a reduction in dev cost (that hopefully the AI would use to good effect), or maybe the ability to choose a focus for a colonial nation when it forms (trade, development, military, goods production, taxation) so that colonial nations are more useful to their overlord.

Also why is Connecticut the highest development in the US? One would think the non OPM native capitals or larger ports would have the most development.
So your Idea to make the CNs better is to make them have cheaper dev costs? That does not sound like a good idea for anyone without the dlc.(or playing with it off because they do not like it) You will need to come up with something that helps those without the dlc, otherwise you are leaving a good chunk of the playerbase with a sub par new world and no way to make it better.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Xdevo

Major
71 Badges
Apr 28, 2015
557
1.333
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • March of the Eagles
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Victoria 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Rome Gold
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
So your Idea to make the CNs better is to make them have cheaper dev costs? That does not sound like a good idea for anyone without the dlc.(or playing with it off because they do not like it) You will need to come up with something that helps those without the dlc, otherwise you are leaving a good chunk of the playerbase with a sub par new world and no way to make it better.

My CN thing was more for the AI (your colonial nations) who would likely be the ones developing the provinces (unless you happened to be on NA which is being changed anyway). But I guess the AI won't develop without the DLC since you can't, forgot about that part. I suppose events and/or adding it to the tech tree would be the best way to add to use it for non-DLC players.