• 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.

EU4 - Development Diary - 12th of March 2019

Let’s talk about Germany. Before I begin, I’d like you all to spare a few minutes to examine the image below:

nightmare.png


As you may be aware this is a screenshot of the glorious, beautiful, and ambitious EU4 mod ‘Voltaire’s Nightmare’. I’d like to assure you all that we are not going to implement this or anything like this in vanilla EU4.

So what are we going to do? Well for one thing we’re going to continue to rely on abstractions such as the existence of a country called “Switzerland” in 1444 rather than a multitude of semi-independent cantons. “Accuracy”, beyond a certain point, ceases to be relevant or else Voltaire’s Nightmare becomes the standard. Good design, rather than “accuracy”, is what should guide us here.

On that note, I’ve devised a few design guidelines that will advise the way we plan out the region, some of which I’ll share with you now. Bear in mind that these are guidelines and not hard rules; there will likely be the occasional exception.
  • Provinces owned by free cities should be approximately Frankfurt-sized. This creates extra space, as well as a visual distinction between Free Cities and other OPM’s.
  • All other provinces should be noticeably larger than Free City provinces. This sets a limit to how far we should split up the region.

  • A development increase in Germany in to be expected, but we should aim to keep it under control. Germany should not be dramatically more developed in the European update compared to 1.28

  • We should specifically avoid increasing the starting development of majors like Austria, Burgundy, and Bohemia.

  • It is more acceptable for “new” development to be added to weaker and/or new tags

  • It can be tempting to split tags up for the sake of “accuracy”, but keep in mind that we still want a mix of large, small, and medium powers. Consider the impact on the balance of power.

  • Adding new tags designed to begin as vassals is sometimes desirable, but starting liberty desire should be kept under 50%. If this cannot be achieved without disproportionately buffing the development of the overlord, it is better not to have the vassal.

  • Avoid adding independent OPM’s. There are literally hundreds of OPM’s that we could but definitely should not add to the game. New OPM’s should be restricted to Free Cities or else have a very good reason to exist.

  • Avoid non-contiguous country borders. This is messy for a variety of reasons, including military access.

  • Provinces adjacencies should be clearly visible, always more than a few pixels. Likewise avoid ‘four corners’ style adjacencies where possible.

  • It should look good. Think about aesthetics in terms of province borders, states, historical borders, etc.
I’ll skip the nostalgic retrospective today and get right into the gritty details. Let’s take a look at southern Germany:

southgermany.png


Bavaria is looking rather monolithic in 1.28, but it was not so historically. Divided between several Duchies most notably based in Munich, Landshut, and Ingolstadt, the Wittelsbach dynasty is at odds with itself in 1444. Bavaria wouldn’t be united until 1503, when Albrecht IV instituted primogeniture. There were also other independent polities in Bavaria such as the Bishopric of Passau and the Free City of Regensburg. We’re going to have to decide how many Bavarian states are going to exist in 1444, but we are determined for the answer to be “more”. Overall the region’s total development seems a little lackluster compared to the likes of Austria and Bohemia, so expect to see it boosted by comparison.

Looking to the west, there is the potential for more Free Cities in Swabia, as well as splitting the large province of Wurttemberg. Switzerland is trickier. We certainly don’t want to represent each province as a nation, but the fact is that the Swiss Confederacy wasn’t as large in 1444 as we currently present it. Graubünden for instance, later unified under the Three Leagues, had yet to be incorporated. We certainly want to add a province, and very possibly also a tag, for the city of Geneva. Geneva in 1444 was a somewhat unwilling subject of Savoy, and would eventually secure its liberation through entry into the Swiss Confederacy. We're also thinking about how we want to represent that rather unique "government" of the Confederacy, but more on that much later. The passes through the Alps could also use some work; we feel that there ought to be a connection between Savoia and Piedmont, while the pass between Piedmont and Wallis seems less necessary.

northgermany.png


And here’s northern Germany. As I noted in my design guidelines, there’s a temptation to overboard splitting up e.g. Saxony and Brunswick into many small duchies. In this region I think we should resist this urge for the sake of maintaining a mix of countries of different power levels within the HRE. Saxony for instance shall likely remain united. There are however candidates for splitting and potential new tags that could be added to the region. Pomerania and Silesia are both good candidates for division. Luneburg, Verden, and Magdeburg could potentially be elevated from OPM status. New OPM’s such as the Free City of Nordhausen are also possibilities. We’ll be carefully considering which provinces and countries merit inclusion and how they each fit into our overall goals for the region.

Moving on to the Low Countries, this is a region that has seen a lot of iteration over the course of EU4’s history. There is very little that can still be done without over-inflating its province density and risking an excessive reduction in the development of each province. That said, some changes we’re considering include an additional province in Flanders, splitting up Brabant, and adding the province of Julich (though we’re not quite sure how Julich is going to work). The Friesland/Utrecht border is something often complained about and will likely be revised in some way, though the solution probably will not be to add a new province. I’ve also seen suggestions for adding Frisian culture along parts of the coast, which is something we’re considering.

I hope that I’ve been able to give you some insight into the way we think about map changes, and once again I look forward to hearing your thoughts on Germany and the HRE. This concludes our series of dev diaries on the upcoming map changes. Next week you’ll be hearing from me again, but this time on the subject of mission trees.
 
Last edited:
I m quite disapointed by this DD. After seeing a lots of province in Ireland or India (in one case more province in the other more dev), I was hopping more for Germany. You cannot fear a messy area or power too strong when you have already done this kind of thing before. That's intellectual lazyness.
 
@Roland Traveler You don't know me if you think I'm impossible (or even hard) to please. I think I have more than enough reasons to stay pessimistic until we see good results. I see all kinds of red flags if things like Magdeburg-splits get mentioned, even if it's just an idea, because of the last two map-updates. I was also talking about ideas of the devs, some of which are inspired by the community. I've made a whole HRE suggestion together with some other guys for a reason.

I don’t need to know you (that argument is just a way to shut down opposition without addressing their actual point), nor did I say you shouldn’t be pessimistic. But when you say that doing exactly what was asked of the devs by the community doesn’t help set you at ease, yes, you’re being impossible to please. There’s a world of difference between “I still have some misgivings, but this is a step in the right direction” and “Despite you trying to reach out to the community, I still don’t think you’re going to do anything right.”
 
You should seriously buff up Brandenburg's starting dev, maybe add a province or two. Right now it doesn't stand a chance against Poland or Austria early game, it basically needs to beg to exist really. BUFF BRANDENBURG DEVELOPMENT PLEASEEEEEE! Also, more provinces in the HRE, you increased the prov number in all of europe and left Germany basically the same as vanilla.
 
I kinda don't see why Silesia should be split into multiple tags, if Saxony is to be kept in one piece. It could use more provicnes though (the game files already contain notes on them from Trin Tragula anyway), and Kladsko should be part of Bohemia in 1444. Making Lusatia(s) a separate releasable/vassal tag would make more sense IMHO.

By the way, right now there are only two unreleased nations in the German part of the HRE. Thuringia and Meissen. Thuringia used to exist in 1444 prior to Art of War and its current province is very large, yet still comparably small to rest of Saxony, so I don't see why it couldn't start as a vassal to Saxony for example. Meissen is weird, because under realistic circumstances it cannot even be spawned and lacks any cores, which doesn't make much sense, given that it was integrated deeper into Saxony only a few years before the start date. Maybe a core would do it justice?

In my opinion, Thuringia should start the game in a personal union with Saxony, which is the historical reality at that point. The Wettins, as Margraves of Meissen (at this point) inherited Thuringia in 1247, gave it to a cadet branch in 1349, and it was only inherited back by the main line (by this point the Electors of Saxony) in 1440, only 4 years before the game starts. It was promptly divided back off again in 1445 (only a year after the game starts), although that resulted in a nasty little civil war. The main line inherited it again in 1482, but it was split off again in 1485, and eventually (after some more territorial changes) this division became permanent between the Albertine and Ernestine lines of the Wettin Dynasty. Granted, the game can't handle the subsequent division of Thuringia into all the minor Saxon Duchies, so abstracting them as "Thuringia" is probably the best that can be done. Having Thurningia as the junior partner in a personal union with Saxony would represent the fact that the game manages to start in one of the few short periods that Thuringia was united with the main part of Saxony.

(Edit: I see some others up thread are talking about the 1445 Division of Altenburg as well)

And the game definitely needs to have a direct Savoy - Piedmont connection through the Alps. It just looks bad that if Savoy-Piedmont is reduced to its historical borders in the Switzerland area, there isn't a direct connection between the two available. Mont Cenis Pass has been used by quite a few armies in its time, after all..
 
I've read quite a few posts talking about buffing Austria so it can deal with the Ottomans and France and I was going to say that Venice is the key to addressing that; if Venice is stronger, which it should be, then it can act as another counterweight against the Ottomans and give Austria the breathing room needed to survive France.

...

However... I have a different, perhaps more interesting, idea that could maybe help achieve a few things that people seem to be asking for: an 'Aligned Nation' mechanic.

'Aligned Nations' could act as a complimentary but opposite mechanic to the 'Rivals' mechanic. The AI or player would receive benefits for having 'Aligned Nations' but no negative modifiers if they don't have them.

What would 'Aligned Nations' be? An Aligned Nation would be a nation that has the same religion and technology group as you, that you don't want to ally (because you might want to steal one of their provinces at an opportune moment or don't want to waste a diplo-slot or are waiting to see how things pan out before signing an official alliance or whatever), but that has similar strategic goals as you. Austria and Venice are the example I'm thinking of here; they both want to stop Ottoman expansion, but maybe Austria would like Venetian lands if they get the chance. This mechanic could also work for some Native American tribes in resisting Europeans, nations of the HRE looking to influence electors, Irish minors, Indian nations in resisting Europeans, etc. Essentially, it'd be like a "fair weather friend" mechanic.

What would 'Aligned Nations' do? In short, give benefits in times of war (and maybe times of peace too). The (very rough, first thought) benefits I was thinking of would be based around the existing Rival system. Imagine that in this scenario that Austria has chosen Venice as an 'Aligned Nation' and the Ottomans declare war on Venice. Venice should now gain automatic military access and fleet basing rights to Austrian provinces. For a relations penalty hit they should (could?) be able to unilaterally take 10% of Austrian income and 10% of Austrian manpower recovery - this would represent financial support and Austrian volunteers mobilised for Venice/against the Ottomans. In the next scenario, imagine that both Austria and Venice have chosen each other as 'Aligned Nations.' Should one of the two end up at war with the Ottomans (or whoever else) then the other should gain a "Strategic Moment" CB where they are can also independently DoW on the Ottomans and gain a 5% morale boost for doing so.

Although this sounds quite similar to how alliances work anyway, it's actually very different; because there's no official alliance in play, Austria could instead choose to DoW on Venice anyway, preferring to pick off Venice rather than have a 5% morale boosted stab at the Ottomans.

This is only a bare bones idea and would need a lot of refining, but variations could be; that both countries need to choose each other as 'Aligned Nations' for bonuses to be possible; that a country has five slots to fill with Rivals and Aligned Nations and can fill them with a combination of 0 and 5, 2 and 3, 4 and 1, or however they'd like; that countries get a trade bonus from trading in nodes controlled by an Aligned Nation; that there are more diplomatic options (Support Foreign Government or Suppress Foreign Rebels (instead of Support Rebels)); other ideas people can think of.

There is real life precedent for this too [https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/america-india-aligned-not-allied-16592], and although that link is about India and the USA nowadays, this kind of diplomacy has existed for centuries and I think would add another layer of diplomatic play to EU4 - will you rival everyone, or align yourself with other nations to achieve mutual goals?

EDIT: I also think 'Aligned Nations' (or whatever it should/could be called) would make Power Projection make more sense; Power Projection should also be about shrewd diplomatic choices and aligning yourself with nations who have similar goals, not just having three Rivals and going to war with them!
 
Last edited:
The province density in the HRE should be bigger than Ireland or Japan or at least be on the same level. Anything else would be very disappointing to say the least and theres no reason this cant be done. You dont need to go full Voltaires Nightmare but the more tags in the HRE the better. Also no more generic german ideas for any HRE tag, there are more than plenty of good suggestions in the forum. Every tag with generic ideas is a wasted tag in general.
A good HRE map update alone would be enough to persuade me to buy the next dlc, it is one of the most interesting areas in that time frame and needs all the love it can get after it was left untouched for some many patches.
 
Provinces on the map are not neat rectangles (and unfortunately don't have tourist attractions to tell you about their borders), so it can be very difficult to determine what is a four corner and what is not quite a four corner. An egregious case I can think of right now is the Lahore-Delhi-Agra-Ladakh intersection in Avalon Hill's Maharaja, for which they gave a map errata. The devs have a very good reason to avoid things like that.

There might not be perfect four corners in the game, but there are parts that are questionable, I have attached a zoomed in screenshot as Exhibit A. I'm not looking to get into an argument about it, just stating that there are parts of the map that can be confusing with too narrow separation between provinces which becomes even harder in province dense HRE/Germany.
 

Attachments

  • 20190312232143_1.jpg
    20190312232143_1.jpg
    101,6 KB · Views: 123
I don’t need to know you (that argument is just a way to shut down opposition without addressing their actual point), nor did I say you shouldn’t be pessimistic. But when you say that doing exactly what was asked of the devs by the community doesn’t help set you at ease, yes, you’re being impossible to please. There’s a world of difference between “I still have some misgivings, but this is a step in the right direction” and “Despite you trying to reach out to the community, I still don’t think you’re going to do anything right.”
A way to shut down opposition? No. I'm also pointing out all kinds of questionable ideas with facts and other suggestions, so I'm still adressing the actual point. You began with the line that I might be impossible to please, which isn't the case. That's a way to shut down opposition.

They don't have to do exactly what I or others think, but some "quite obvious" things haven't been mentioned for whatever reason and I just find that worrying. Things I and others pointed out yesterday and some of which are outlined on the suggestion-forum and have been there for a while now.

I'd preferably have you and me discuss those things (like Magdeburg, Saxony-split, no news on Austria or Cilli, etc.) rather than ourselves.
 
Last edited:
I foresee multiplayer imbalance if you buff Austria, the main issue with Austria is that the AI preforms badly as Austria not that Austria is very weak.
The main issue with Austria is unlike France or Ottomans, Austria starts as a diplomat (because historically it didn't expand though war at the start of the game) so is less aggressive, on top of that AI Austria doesn't want to get into early wars because it like to have a full manpower pool first and Austria starts with about 1/5 of its manpower.

As a player Austria you would go to war as soon as possible because most of your time will be spent waiting for your AE to drop down so player Austria always expand much quicker than AI Austria at the moment so to make the multiplayer game balanced the dev team have sacrificed single player Austrian performance

from what I can see there are 3 solutions, all of which have issues
1: make AI Austria balanced personality from the start, this will cause weirder alt-histories like you see in multiplayer games because Austria will be growing from a much earlier point in the game but AI Austria would do better as a result
2: buff the Austrian lands then split Lower and Upper Austria then make Upper Austria balanced personality, this could work as a early game block for Austria in the same way all the Russian Minors work to slow down Muscovy, Upper Austria would have to spend AE taking on Lower Austria at the start of the game meaning a player Austria could not expand as quickly despite being made stronger, however the HRE unlike Russia is a little more unpredictable and there is little stopping a lower Austria tag from making strong allies or being conquered by Bohemia which would be a long term debuff to Austria as it would be without Vienna its highest development province and the main trade city in the area
3: buff the Austrian lands then turn the Austrian starting monarch into a regency council, this would work to balance the singleplayer game with the multiplayer game since both Austria's now cannot declare wars however this comes at the cost of making Austria not fun to play as
 
Austria needs a 'buff' in the amount of provinces, it's the least-performing tag out of England, France, Ottomans, Castille, etc.

It hasn't received a new province since EU3 (even lost one; Triest). There's also room for independent princes, like the bishopric of Trent, the county of Gorizia and the county of Cilli.
 
Last edited:
The HRE should have more formable intermediate tags, Swabia being one example. This would help model local small powers consolidating into larger players within the HRE over the campaign, as they eat each other and form larger tags. It would be one way of depicting the HRE becoming more centralized over time.

Perhaps Brunswick and Bavaria could be split up at game start and serve the same purpose. Lotharingia and the Kingdom of Burgundy-Arles would be other nice intermediate tags to have.
 
When talking Free Cities in Swabia, you have to consider (Schwäbisch) Hall. One of the largest if not largest areas governed by a Free City in the south of Germany only surpassed by Nürnberg. The famous German coin "Heller" was coined here (with a proverb in German still sometimes used today. Not worth a red Heller - Keinen roten Heller wert). Go for it! Additional upside: it has just four letters and looks good on the map when you compare it to Rothenburg ob der Tauber!
 
When talking Free Cities in Swabia, you have to consider (Schwäbisch) Hall. One of the largest if not largest areas governed by a Free City in the south of Germany only surpassed by Nürnberg. The famous German coin "Heller" was coined here (with a proverb in German still sometimes used today. Not worth a red Heller - Keinen roten Heller wert). Go for it! Additional upside: it has just four letters and looks good on the map when you compare it to Rothenburg ob der Tauber!
Rothenburg was more sizable, though.