Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries
Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Europa Universalis IV 82782 EUIV: Bug Reports 1355 EUIV: Suggestions 19383 EUIV: Technical Support 6899 EUIV: FAQ & Strategy Guides 241 EUIV: AAR's, Let's Plays, and Fan Fiction EU IV: Alternate History Short Story Contest Contr 30
Previous dev diary Next dev diary
Show only dev responses

EU4 - Development Diary - 10th of April 2018

Good day! Today we're getting right into the dev diary by continuing on from last week, where we announced large changes to the Government System in Europa Universalis IV. Last week we talked about Monarchies, today, by popular request, let's look at Republics.

I'll start by re-iterating that these changes will not result in the removal of special government mechanics with or without the expansion. The Militarization of the Prussian Monarchy, Mamluk Government Interactions, Dutch republic mechanics etc will all still be in the game, and tied to Government Reforms rather than being a specific government type in itself.

Also the new government reforms are part of the upcoming yet unannounced Expansion Pack. For those who get the 1.26 update but not the expansion, you will still have access to the different government mechanics, but not the new reform choices seen below.

Most Serene.png


Our Government Reforms interface is coming along, with significantly fewer placeholders than before. Now, outside of Hordes, Republics are my favourite government types. No regencies ever, control over which monarch points you get, ruler generals aplenty. That said it's clear to see that since Absolutism arrived on the scene, they have been left feeling a little lackluster, not to mention they have always been that bit too inflexible.

With that in mind, the Republican Reform path contains up to ten different reforms, putting them ahead as the most diverse set we're adding. Let's see what's on offer (all values and effects very subject to balance and change)

  • Oligarchy vs Merchant Class vs Noble Elite
    • Oligarchy: +5% Tax, elections every 4 Years
    • Merchants: Enables Merchant Republic mechanics, -10 max Absolutism
    • Noble Elite: +0.25 Army Tradition, + Nobility Estate influence, elections every 8 years
    • Presidential Despot:
    • Revolutionary Republic - (Special for Revolutionary Target)
    • [Other Special Republics]
  • Republican Virtues
    • Autocratic: -1 Unrest
    • Nepotism: Each candidate get +1 random stat
    • Republicanism: +0.2 republican tradition
  • Frequent Elections vs consolidation of power
    • -1 years between elections, -10 max absolutism
    • +1 year between elections, +10 max absolutism
  • Federalism vs Unitarism vs Confederacy
    • Provincial Governments: -25% State Maintenance
    • Administrative Divisions: +5 States
    • Union of States: +10% Global Trade Power
    • Seizure of Power: [HIDDEN]
  • Parliamentary vs Presidential
    • Parliamentary: Enables Parliaments if Common Sense DLC, else -1 Unrest
    • Presidential Rule: -10% Institution Embracement Cost
  • Consolidation of Power
    • Broaden Executive powers: -15% Stability cost
    • Devolution of powers: +1 Diplomat
  • Guiding Principle of Administration
    • Political Principle - +1 [HIDDEN]
    • Moral Principle - +1 [HIDDEN]
  • Electorate
    • Landholders: +10% Manpower Recovery Speed
    • Citizenry: +10% Land Morale
  • Office Selection
    • Sortition: -0.05 Yearly Corruption
    • Universal Suffrage: +1 Accepted Culture
  • Question of Dictatorship
    • Seize Executive Power: Become Monarchy, lose 4 reforms
    • Proclaim Divine Guidance: Become a Theocracy, lose 6 reforms
    • Strengthen executive powers: +25 Max Absolutism
    • Reinforce Republican Values: +1 [HIDDEN] -25% Republican Tradition Cost of re-elections
    • Revolutionary Empire (For Revolutionary Target): Makes ruler into a Dictator
Next week we will round off by looking at what's in store for Theocracies and Tribals with these government changes. After-which we might even start hinting at where this upcoming expansion and Update focuses on.
 
Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Ashen Rain said:
Or is that "mechanic" included in that reform? If this is the case, does this also mean I could now play Venice but NOT take the merchant republic reform and not be handicapped by the province limit?
Click to expand...
If you play Venice then you would start the game with the Merchant Republic reform already picked. The first row of reforms represent the base governments that already exist.
 
Can we eventually do something about Advisors? EU3's system is far better, get the freaking one you want. I don't think a country would sit there and pay a 65 gold retirement fee to someone then just hope a new guy you actually want would show up. Right now it's basically a lottery and it f'ing sucks.
 
Last edited:
TheAtreides84 said:
What's the problem? People playing since day one didn't have the DLC. They purchased them one at the time, and still had fun. You can do the same and you wouldn't be any worse off, or you could just save the money and buy them all at the end. There is literally no downside.
Click to expand...
It's a problem because either way you're spending hundreds of dollars on a single game. No other company has that much bloating in its DLC policy except maybe EA.
 
Stratagyfan101 said:
If Paradox would bite the bullet (which risks pissing off people like myself that bought the Estates DLC) and redesign Estates, making them free, I could see them being very well incorporated into this new system. Rather than have government changes be random clicks, and estate being an isolated mechanic, the estate events could shift the influence of each estate, enabling these government reforms which then set a new baseline which each estate expects to be at (and where each expects the other to be at). Anything out of line results in unrest which could lead to different reforms.
Click to expand...
I mean I don't think very many people bought the Cossacks for the estates
 
Ixal said:
Interesting that we have two different HIDDEN as otherwise Guiding Principles of Administration doesnt make sense.
Click to expand...
"So my choice is '..or death'?"
"Well, to be honest, I didn't expect the cake to be so popular".
 
TheDungen said:
I would suggest
  • Nepotism: -1 Unrest
  • Meritocracy: Each candidate get +1 random stat
  • Partisanship: +0.2 republican tradition
Click to expand...
For some reason, the words "Order", "Equality" and "Liberty" seem like a natural fit for those...
 
I'm too lazy and (most important of all) hungover to read all the messages, so excuse me if this has been asked before:

Will there be an absolutist-positive option in Republics? Like Cromwell's in England, for example.
 
I want to remind on the modifiers shown in these dev diaries. Everything is super early in production and none of these are final. People have voiced concern of nepotism, it will not necessarily look like this at release which is far far off. The modifier is a placeholder and was just me randomly writing "Here's nepotism and some modifier to associate with it". We'll probably keep the name nepotism though, but change the effect eventually.
 
Petit Mort said:
For some reason, the words "Order", "Equality" and "Liberty" seem like a natural fit for those...
Click to expand...
Really? Eh... which one of those do you relate to one another?
Nepotism-Liberty
Meritocracy-Equality
Partisanship-Order?
 
TheAtreides84 said:
They started executing each other, like Danton and Saint-Just? It's not like France before that was devoid of any notion of merit: noblesse de robe actually formed a quite educated bureaucracy in service of the king, even if the access was nepotistic. Montesquieu was one of them, for example. Still our modern idea of merit would be fairly unhistorical in the context of the game: even the Chinese one would not be understood as such by modern standards, since it had a lot of exceptions (notably for women), quotas and even outright commerce of titles.

I think the term isn't the most sound because of its modern stigma, but it can make some historical sense.
Click to expand...
Well it's not really until napoleon that there really can be considered meritocracy.
And I was mostly thinking in the military actually where the promotion of commoners were incredibly rare. Really it's a question of social mobility are people allowed to rise to the highest classes or not. And yes this was very much a question in this era.

I would say that technocracy is more an example of the kind of meritocracy that is not fitting for this era, since educated experts only really become a thing in the latter half of the period at best.
 
Last edited:
TheDungen said:
Well it's not really until napoleon that there really can be considered meritocracy.
And I was mostly thinking in the military actually where the promotion of commoners were incredibly rare.
Click to expand...

That's true, but you can argue the prussian, and then german general staff was drawn from a specific aristocratic class, that of the eastern junkers, and still managed to be the best one in western history. So see, nepotism understood in a certain sense *can* be a way to ensure quality in societies where traditional roles trump personal education and social mobility.
 
TheAtreides84 said:
That's true, but you can argue the prussian, and then german general staff was drawn from a specific aristocratic class, that of the eastern junkers, and still managed to be the best one in western history. So see, nepotism understood in a certain sense *can* be a way to ensure quality in societies where traditional roles trump personal education and social mobility.
Click to expand...
Well the thing with military castes is that they work well for a time after being established but then over time become an entrenched elite. That's what happened to the noble caste/class who certainly started out as a military caste, and it also eventually did happen to the german officers corps, in ww1 when they refuse to accept any peace where they give up land their soldiers died to take. Eventually leading to a situation when the German leadership was in total denial about it's ability to actually win the war.

And no military castes do not foster social mobility they do however when they work ensure that certain military traditions are passed on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back