• 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 - 13th of October 2021

Hello everybody, and welcome! This week we will shift the focus from the upcoming African content, to the new Monuments that we will be introducing for Leviathan DLC owners, and that will come along with the 1.32 patch.

As this has been quite a popular feature of the last DLC, we felt that we could create a few more for the game. And when I say a few, I mean that we’ve almost doubled them, with 52 new monuments being added. So first let’s talk a bit about the creative process and the decisions that we made when choosing which ones we wanted, and then I will be showing some of them (although not all, as that would really be a long post, and we want to surprise you a bit when looking at them for the first time ingame!).

The creative process started a few months ago, just after releasing the new Monuments of 1.31.5 patch. As we pointed out back then, the thing that takes more time about this feature is the Art involved, and because of that you’ve not heard anything about them in a few months. So, we really wanted to choose some beautiful and meaningful buildings to be included.

Apart from that, we also wanted the regional distribution of the Monuments to be a bit fairer, as we felt that some regions were crowded with them, but others were a bit sparse. So here you have a sneak peak of that:

1.32 New Monuments.png



Now we have 18 monuments in America (11 new), 31 in Europe (16 new), 9 in Africa (5 new), 45 in Asia (19 new), and 2 in Oceania (1 new). That’s 52 new monuments in total. We would have preferred to have a few more monuments here and there, but overall we are mostly happy with the result, and we really hope you enjoy them.

So, where did our inspiration to pick the new ones come from? First we incorporated the ones that were voted for in the forum around May; so, Cahokia, Malbork Castle, Brandenburg Gate, Santa Maria del Fiore, Bran Castle, the Rock-Hewn Churches of Lalibela, the Great Living Chola Temples, Porcelain Tower of Nanjing and Nan Madoll are in.

Then, we had been gathering suggestions from the community here in the forums, in the Monuments-specific threads. We have to thank you all for the passion you showed, as we had a long-list of around 100 Monuments to pick from, and that was a great inspiration for us. Last, but not least, we checked a lot of different places from the UNESCO World Heritage list.

Now let’s go to the cool part of the DD, and let me show you some of the new Monuments.

[Disclaimer: modifiers are currently being tested by us and our QA, so expect changes on them when 1.32 patch is released.]

First one we want to show you is in the Americas: the Qhapaq Ñam, portraying the famous Incan Road System. Although we brainstormed a bit about how we could do this without being attached to only one province, we thought that it would be a bit difficult to do, and we wanted to be coherent with the other monuments, which are located in only one province. Anyway, we represented this as a buff for an united Andean Empire, and because of that it’s on the most northern tag of the region. If you notice the last modifier, it is a new one affecting Yearly Inti Authority (there's a word lacking there to be fixed, yes!), so we think it’s a nice buff for the main religion in the region:

Qhapac.png


Next one is Santa Maria del Fiore, one widely requested by the community, and one that we obviously think should be included, as being so Stendhal-esque! We took the opportunity to add a nice modifier to it, so here you have this Monthly Splendor modifier that we think fits perfectly with it:

Firenze.png


Now let’s move to Africa. It was obvious for us that some new Monuments had to be added to the region we’re focusing on for the next Immersion Pack, and make them useful with the new content we’ve been designing. So here you’ve got the famous Rock-Hewn Churches at Lalibela, that gives some extra flavour when playing as Ethiopia, as it’s our first Coptic-related Monument. And I’ll give you some extra info, not directly related with today’s DD, but with this area: yes, we will have some new mechanics for Judaism! But those will be revealed in a couple weeks.

Lalibela.png


Let’s go now to Asia. Here we’ve added a bunch of monuments to India, as we felt this subcontinent to be a bit empty of Monuments in comparison to other regions. One of those is Hampi, the renowned capital of Vijayanagar, that grew as a really princely city (until being razed by the Bahmani Empire, of course…). So, here we’ve got a couple of interesting things to show. First is the new ‘All Estates’ Loyalty Equilibrium’, that now will make our lives (and modders’ ones!) easier, as we can add this loyalty equilibrium modifier to all the existing estates in our country. The other thing is that we added a couple new requirements for Buddhist Monuments, so now they can be used also by Hindu countries with a ruler following the Buddha cult, or by Fetishist ones that follow Buddhadharma. [Obviously the Hindu Buddha cult is redundant in this Monument, as it can be used by Dharmic religion groups, but we wanted to show this fix we’ve done in this pic.]

Hampi.png


To end with the Oceania continent, we’ve added here its second monument, the settlement of Nan Madoll. We wanted this to work as a kind of race prize and reward for colonizing the Pacific islands, so because of that the nice modifiers for colonization, coupled with the Yearly Navy Tradition one.

Nan Madoll.png


That’s mostly all for today! Because I want to make a last announcement: Paradox Tinto will be joining the Grandest Lan event with a Dev (Dream) Team! Probably we will be beaten badly by everyone else in the game, but at least it will probably be fun.

Next week we will come back to the new African content, and my colleague @Ogele will be talking about Mutapa and Kilwa new missions, among other things. I’ll be reading your feedback along this week, see you!
 
  • 113Like
  • 36Love
  • 26
  • 8
  • 7
  • 3Haha
Reactions:
I disagree. Just look at the Leviathan monuments which were designed and balanced supposedly by people you described as having experience in good game design, and not by a popularity contest.

Didn't say they have "good experience" Only it should be done by people who have one. Maybe that's a problem, but I don't know, don't have enough knowledge to say that. But even if it's so, it doesn't justify using this forum as a popularity guage 1 week befere lauch of sth. This is a receipe for disaster if you change sth before release without a due process on somebody whim basically. Bad habits bad standards that will lead to future botch-ups.

I agree mostly with what you're saying but this is dealt by increasing a team by right people, not by using forum-style opinion to circumvent the whole process at the last moment. I'm not saying you can't use forum and opinions. You can but in right way. Ideas / directions etc at the begining of the development process.

I would also give them same slack because it's not like the team right now worked on EU4 from the beginning. I'm happy they still working on this game, and not pulled the plug Imperator-style.
 
Last edited:
13 monuments in the Indian Subcontinent ?! Isn't that a bit ridiculous ? Also France still has no monument outside of the province of Paris, adding Le Mont-Saint-Michel or the Palace of the Popes would be nice, not to mention Scotland, Ireland, Denmark and Sweden got shafted and still have no monuments, the new distribution of monuments seems hardly better than the previous one.

Thinks 13 monuments in the Indian Subcontinent is too many; proposes the number in Europe should be brought closer to 40. Interesting take there buddy, but your bias is showing...
 
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
Didn't say they have "good experience" Only it should be done by people who have one. Maybe that's a problem, but I don't know, don't have enough knowledge to say that. But even if it's so, it doesn't justify using this forum as a popularity guage 1 week befere lauch of sth. This is a receipe for disaster if you change sth before release without a due process on somebody whim basically. Bad habits bad standards that will lead to future botch-ups.

I agree mostly with what you're saying but this is dealt by increasing a team by right people, not by using forum-style opinion to circumvent the whole process at the last moment. I'm not saying you can't use forum and opinions. You can but in right way. Ideas / directions etc at the begining of the development process.

I would also give them same slack because it's not like the team right now worked on EU4 from the beginning. I'm happy they still working on this game, and not pulled the plug Imperator-style.
The game doesn't exist in a vacuum, they are developing it so that we, the players will play with it. Our opinion will have a bearing on how things ultimately end up, because we will have to be the ones that pay for and use the product they make. Sure, they could impose their will on us, but if their ideas are seen by the community as bad, eventually it will lead to nobody buying further content and the game dying. I'm not proposing they go out into the streets of Barcelona and ask a random Spanish guy what he thinks about the monuments, I'm asking them to gauge the opinion of those who'll end up using the released product.

Just take a look at what happened with the very first dev diary of this release, in which they designed and showed a ridiculous and OP mission for Mali, which didn't sit at all well with the community. They listened to the feedback and changed the proposed feature in a week. Player feedback is not just some forum popularity contest, it is essential to developing a product that will be well received by the community.

Give some credit to the developers, they are capable of deciding which eventual criticism is valid and which is not. I'm not even saying they should re-balance the new monuments until release, I'm just saying that letting the inevitable debate take place sooner could help the development process and help rebuild the trust that was lost over the recent years and releases with the people who use the product they are developing.
 
Last edited:
Give some credit to the developers, they are capable of deciding which eventual criticism is valid and which is not. I'm not even saying they should re-balance the new monuments until release, I'm just saying that letting the inevitable debate take place sooner could help the development process and help rebuild the trust that was lost over the recent years and releases with the people who use the product they are developing.


With that I agree. But it's still the issue what are they asking about. I don't think asking whether to put one monuments here or there or what it does is a good idea if this process is sort of random and for worse at the last moment of implementing mechanics. I can understand you or plenty of other people here can contribute in momument case but as a process this is not something that will lead to consistent good results. It will not. In fact you will that way botch more DLC's than you would improve with net loss for the game. Mostly because this is not white-black cases whether sth is better or worse most of the time. There is always for and against at the same time.

So if they see a need for some brainstroming in certain areas, I would be in favor with that. But I would not be in favor of publishing everything and we gather every opinion on everything whoever whises to contribute sth and trying to implement the consensus. This is terrible. Maybe good in some utopian world but not if you have a small team of couple of people trying to improve a game or make a DLC. It's just about resource and time managment. And firing shots randomly is always a receipe for disaster. Yeah you can get some lucky shots from time to time. But that's it. And I'm afraid PDX can't reload the save to make the DLC again and again. I bet they wished it would be the case. But unfortunetly they're playing on Ironman when making the game. I'm certain they tried F4 some DLCs though :D. Imagine Johan frantically hitting F4 after Leviathan launch...................... : F4, F4, F4, F4. "Abort the launch of the DLC." F4 F4 F4.. "Damn it.................. Why doesn't it work???????????? It worked when I tried Papal State Moon achievement yesterday. Dang.... PDX team. Time for plan B. Gather your people....... We're hitting power plants........................................ Time to reset everything................"
 
Last edited:
With that I agree. But it's still the issue what are they asking about. I don't think asking whether to put one monuments here or there or what it does is a good idea if this process is sort of random and for worse at the last moment of implementing mechanics. I can understand you or plenty of other people here can contribute in momument case but as a process this is not something that will lead to consistent good results. It will not. In fact you will that way botch more DLC's than you would improve with net loss for the game. Mostly because this is not white-black cases whether sth is better or worse most of the time. There is always for and against at the same time.

So if they see a need for some brainstroming in certain areas, I would be in favor with that. But I would not be in favor of publishing everything and we gather every opinion on everything whoever whises to contribute sth and trying to implement the consensus. This is terrible. Maybe good in some utopian world but not if you have a small team of couple of people trying to improve a game or make a DLC. It's just about resource and time managment. And firing shots randomly is always a receipe for disaster. Yeah you can get some lucky shots from time to time. But that's it. And I'm afraid PDX can't reload the save to make the DLC again and again. I bet they wished it would be the case. But unfortunetly they're playing on Ironman when making the game. I'm certain they tried F4 some DLCs though :D. Imagine Johan frantically hitting F4 after Leviathan launch...................... : F4, F4, F4, F4. "Abort the launch of the DLC." F4 F4 F4.. "Damn it.................. Why doesn't it work???????????? It worked when I tried Papal State Moon achievement yesterday. Dang.... PDX team. Time for plan B. Gather your people....... We're hitting power plants........................................ Time to reset everything................"
I think you misunderstood what I am talking about. I'm not asking for community driven development, where every single decision is based on the community's whims and wishes. I'm asking for them to consider revealing sooner than they planned what the new monuments' effects are so that the community can reflect on it, have a debate on it, and formulate its suggestions if needed, so that the somewhat inevitable post-patch balancing can take place sooner, not leaving the game in a possibly broken or near-broken state for weeks or even months on end. I'm not asking them to include us in the design process, that we come up with what they should do, I agree that that'd be developmental anarchy.

If you think about, we were and will be given the chance to give feedback on nearly everything the new DLC will bring, because it's just content, and not mechanics. With the exception of the AI improvements they are doing, we have given feedback on everything they so far presented, and we can't give meaningful feedback on the AI improvements, because, well, we have to see it in practice to even see if they will be indeed improvements or detriments to the AI. But the rest of the stuff that's coming in this DLC, missions, events, national ideas all received feedback as soon as they presented them, and some of that feedback already led to changes before release and helped avoid the cycle where the devs release something and the community is pointing fingers saying 'I've told you so'. We could do the same on the new monument effects if they shared that before release too, shortening the time they can release the balancing patch in, if it will be needed.
 
not leaving the game in a possibly broken or near-broken state for weeks or even months on end.

But what do you consider broken? Like OP concentrade development or OP monuments? They are not unbalanced or broken. This is just a DLC cycle where things get released OP on purpose and rebalanced later to make way for the next DLC with series of OP mechanics. Yeah they say for PR reason this was not the goal. But let's be honest, they say that same story from 2014 and we still get the same movie to watch again and again with every single DLC. Like in EU4 and most PDX games every single mechanics was probably reworked multiple times, and most of them were more OP before they changed it. This is how it is and how it will be. Most sucessful games function that way. OP stuff is released and if the whole state of the game gets out of hand we get massive nerfs. Otherwise you need more manpower to balance stuff right way or risk releasing some stuff that is much worse. Wich is sth that crashes the player and causes them to rage quit the game all the time with maybe some masochist remaining to play on. Do you really want to propose breaking / changing the model on which the game is built upon and try to convice some devs to it? Probably even people from PDX you talk to don't have a say in that matter. This is beyod their scope of responsability and won't be changed. Especially not because some 10 people on the forum say it. It's better to discuss OP mechanics when they are ready to be nerfed. What's the point now if they are being made so strong on purpose. You would be going in front of upcoming train and waving for it to hitchhike you. Yeah. Good luck. I think it would be better if PDX would point out which areas they want brainstroming on, so the time would be used more efficiently. Otherwise most poeple think about stuff that can't be changed anyway because of some crucial company reasons and it's massive waste of time of such a big community.
 
Last edited:
Well, this time things are different. After Leviathan was released, Monuments were heavily balanced in 1.31.1 (day 1 patch), and it was our fault that the balance was not already included in 1.31.0 (release version). Then we used your feedback to further improve them, until we reached the actual iteration of Monuments in 1.31.5 (in June).

Now we will deliver the new Monuments fully tested and balanced (from our POV) in 1.32 release version (as it should be), and then we will use your feedback in the next patches to continue polishing them, as it's not the same taking a look on them on a WIP list, than playing them already tested and balanced. All interesting balance and changes suggested by the community will be introduced in the first patches after the release; I'm taking care of that personally.

This is a very interesting point of view, to be honest. For the moment we're not changing the scope of the monuments (because they use a mix of national, regional and local modifiers that would be hell to change at this point of the development), but if in the future we think it may be worth a rework of the feature, we will probably take into account this type of well-thought suggestions. ;)

Well, if you were the one updating the wiki, I want to thank you your effort, as I think it was very helpful for the entire community. As the wiki is usually fan made, we rely on people like you to keep it updated; obviously if you update it again when 1.32 is released, we will be thankful again. And if you don't want/aren't in the mood/whatever to update it, will try to do it ASAP (although bugfixing will be a more important priority for us at that point, to be honest again). ;)

Will you fix arid climate areas getting monsoon modifiers?
 
Thinks 13 monuments in the Indian Subcontinent is too many; proposes the number in Europe should be brought closer to 40. Interesting take there buddy, but your bias is showing...
Are you seriously comparing an entire continent (which is also the continent that had, BY FAR, the biggest impact on the world during EU4 timeline) to a SUBcontinent ?

Not to mention even without talking about India vs Europe, China proper only got two new monuments for a total of 4 while India got 10 new monuments, more than half of the new monuments added in Asia are in India, this is ridiculous, I'm fine with India getting 13 monuments on the long term, but adding 10 new monuments at once while other regions still have very few monuments is just weird.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I would just say that I agree that Austria should get some kind of monument in Vienna. It's somewhat ridiculous that the palace of Versailles is in game, but nothing representing the imperial residence of the Hapsburg monarchy. I think that Hofburg palace should be included to help Austria remain emperor, especially if other powerful nations around Austria are already being buffed.

This is because if Bohemia allies an elector, then Austria will likely lose the emperorship consistently from then on out. Also minor nations becoming emperor in the HRE is still a problem to if an emperor dies from RNG too early. Schonbrunn Palace is another large palace in Vienna that could be included. It was at times used as the Imperial residence during the summer, and it was initially meant as a grand imperial hunting lodge.

All in all, I don't know your final plans for the Austrian region. At the very least you should include Hofburg palace, given its massive historical significance as the seat of the Hapsburg imperial court. If you were to include it, I would recommend something along these bonuses:

Hofburg Palace

  • Noteworthy: + 0.50 diplomatic reputation, + 5% improved relations
  • Significant: +1 diplomatic relations slot, + 0.75 diplomatic reputation, + 10% improved relations
  • Magnificent: +1 diplomatic relations slot, + 1 diplomatic reputation, + 15% improved relations

It may be worthwhile to include other modifiers instead, or more of them at the magnificent level such as:
liberty desire, income from vassals, aggressive expansion, diplomatic annexation cost, envoy travel time, unjustified demands, some HRE modifier etc..

Links:





Edit: I also agree that there should be at least 1 monument in Stockholm as well, like the royal palace of the Swedish monarchy.

I know this makes Europe more bloated than it is already, but I would include it since by the time you control continental Europe you've basically won the game.

To remedy this, the conditions could be more restricted. For instance, Hofburg palace might only be valid if you're in the HRE & the Swedish royal palace might only be valid if you're Protestant etc...

I would also be amicable to having a landmark in Copenhagen if there's an easy way to restrict the requirements so it can't become too overpowered. It would be a good way to passively buff Northern Europe against Russian aggression from the East.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions:
@Pavía

Since you're reading this thread. Have you thought about using regional bonuses as well? Now we get two things: Global bonus, which is, well, global across the board. And Area modifiers. Area modifiers are pretty weak, no matter how you put it.

There is a compromis to be gotten here. You can make bonusses to regions or subcontinents too, or to provinces that are under some criteria. Some examples would be:
A Sikh monument that gives -15% dev cost reduction, but only in India, or you can make it region only too, or only for your Sikh provinces in India. This way, some European power can get this monument and even if they accept the culture, or are sikh themselves, they can only use it in India/said region. A monument like that would be very powerful if you're playing as a Sikh in India however.
Another example: A Shinto monument that gives +25% manpower, but only in Shinto provinces (even if you're not Shinto yourself). A monument like that would be powerful if you're shinto yourself and converting a lot, but would still be useful for say Confucian Korea/Ming that conquers Japan and accepts their culture, even though it would be less powerful.
A last example: it can be used to change current monuments too. Great Wall of China? Increase the attrition bonus, but only on Chinese subcontinent. Would make more sense in general. Accepting a Chinese culture and upgrading a monument doesn't mean your French provinces have increased attrition.

You can even make the bonus trangress national borders. The improved + attrition could work in other Chinese countries too, like your vasals/allies (not sure how balanced that would be).

The advantage of using it like this is that it encourages you to follow a specific playstyle and thus you can create more powerful monuments for specific playstyles without giving too many bonusses to globe-spanning empires using the collect-em-all mentality. This is currently countered by having it as an accepted culture.

Having it being applied to a region or subcontinent will make the monuments still powerful enough.

You can of course keep many of the global bonusses, but having regional bonusses can make certain regions be more flavorful to play in and make every region a bit different to play in.
 
  • 3Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Developers forgeting that Europe is the center of the world during that years
Technically, if there was a "center", it would be China, who had ~125 million of the world's ~350-450 million people and the world's largest economy until Aurangzeb's Mughal India.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Are you seriously comparing an entire continent (which is also the continent that had, BY FAR, the biggest impact on the world during EU4 timeline) to a SUBcontinent ?
I’ll gladly compare both subcontinents endlessly, and let me tell you that won't be favorable for Europe, but that discussion will only inevitably end up with the Godwin's Law of these forums "the game is called EUROPA universalis" to excuse all the inexusable eurocentrism that is rampant in this community.

Let me instead ask by which metric, other than a subjective sense of European importance and superiority, one could possibly argue for a 1 to 4 ratio monuments spread for India vs Europe, because it sure as hell can't reasonably be cultural, religous or political diversity or importance, economic output or population. In fact the only metric in which India is about 4 times lesser than Europe is size, and I doubt anyone arguing for 40 monuments in Europe would plea for a comparative distribution in the rest of the world based on landmass.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Technically, if there was a "center", it would be China, who had ~125 million of the world's ~350-450 million people and the world's largest economy until Aurangzeb's Mughal India.
and what a stone age? and getting reked by step hords one to thousands.
Paradox keep makaing stupid patched for africa, natives in new zeland, LOL.
Also, read the name of the game.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
and what a stone age? and getting reked by step hords one to thousands.
Paradox keep makaing stupid patched for africa, natives in new zeland, LOL.
Also, read the name of the game.
That's pretty prejudiced, seeing as China was ahead for most of history.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Am I the only one disheartened to see you, the devs, referencing bug fixing upon release more and more frequently (multiple times in this thread, and last week's DD also IIRC)?

Like I know that it's somewhat inevitable that some bugs will make it into the release, or the new stuff might not interact well with the older content, but this constant reiteration makes me feel that this release will be the yet another we, the players will find disappointing.

Confidence on our part is already greatly diminished, and I'm sure you, the devs don't wish to see every release not sit well with those that you are making this game for. I'm honestly rooting for you guys, but I won't lie, this repeated mentions to fixing bugs kinda makes me feel you are trying to manage expectations and get out in front of it to avoid the kind of less then nice welcome and review bombing Leviathan went through from the community. It's just a fleeting thought and might be the autumn blues on my part, and I wholeheartedly hope that I'm wrong and just reading stuff into something that I shouldn't.

On another, but somewhat related note, would it be possible to release those monument effects like two weeks before the release? Along with the patchnotes is probably too late for meaningful feedback to be received and implemented before release, I'm sure you already have your tasks set until that, and there's no time allotted for balancing based on the player's feedback. And even if the balancing can't happen until release, you'll have more time to consider our feedback and implement changes faster, avoiding any balance patch releasing in the middle of January because the holidays are coming up.
To be crystal clear, our intention is quite the opposite: having a much better release than the Leviathan one. Because of that, we've focused so heavily on bugfixing in the past few months, and we want to tackle any issues shown after 1.32 is released ASAP.

Because of that, we want the content to be as tested and polished as possible on our behalf. I know that you would like to have a complete list of all monuments before the patch, but as long as we're still tweaking and balancing things out, we think it's better for you to play with them when we're completely done with our part (even if we then take into account your feedback to change some things after the release ;) ).
In my opinion that I think the requirement for Confucian harmonization could be limited to only East Asia religions like Mahayana, Theravada, Vajrayana, Animist and Tengri with exception of Shinto. That way it may buff Confucian while not letting the religion being overpowered.
That's an interesting idea, we'll have a second thought about it.
Will you fix arid climate areas getting monsoon modifiers?
With these kind of suggestions, please open a post either in Bug Report or Suggestions subforums.
@Pavía

Since you're reading this thread. Have you thought about using regional bonuses as well? Now we get two things: Global bonus, which is, well, global across the board. And Area modifiers. Area modifiers are pretty weak, no matter how you put it.

There is a compromis to be gotten here. You can make bonusses to regions or subcontinents too, or to provinces that are under some criteria. Some examples would be:
A Sikh monument that gives -15% dev cost reduction, but only in India, or you can make it region only too, or only for your Sikh provinces in India. This way, some European power can get this monument and even if they accept the culture, or are sikh themselves, they can only use it in India/said region. A monument like that would be very powerful if you're playing as a Sikh in India however.
Another example: A Shinto monument that gives +25% manpower, but only in Shinto provinces (even if you're not Shinto yourself). A monument like that would be powerful if you're shinto yourself and converting a lot, but would still be useful for say Confucian Korea/Ming that conquers Japan and accepts their culture, even though it would be less powerful.
A last example: it can be used to change current monuments too. Great Wall of China? Increase the attrition bonus, but only on Chinese subcontinent. Would make more sense in general. Accepting a Chinese culture and upgrading a monument doesn't mean your French provinces have increased attrition.

You can even make the bonus trangress national borders. The improved + attrition could work in other Chinese countries too, like your vasals/allies (not sure how balanced that would be).

The advantage of using it like this is that it encourages you to follow a specific playstyle and thus you can create more powerful monuments for specific playstyles without giving too many bonusses to globe-spanning empires using the collect-em-all mentality. This is currently countered by having it as an accepted culture.

Having it being applied to a region or subcontinent will make the monuments still powerful enough.

You can of course keep many of the global bonusses, but having regional bonusses can make certain regions be more flavorful to play in and make every region a bit different to play in.
That's another interesting suggestion for us, although not for the moment, as it would require a whole lot of work to redesign and rebalance all the monuments along this way, but for the future of we want a rework of them.
 
Last edited:
  • 5Like
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions: