• 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 - 15th of January 2019

Good day all and a Happy New Year to you too. After a somewhat extended break I have finally come back to the office and rejoined the rest of the EUIV team. Our immediate tasks at hand are checking on and potentially ironing out any remaining issues from 1.28 as well as putting our plans together for the year.

As we mentioned in the chunky end of year dev diary our focus for the year will be a large European Expansion, with a heavy focus on crushing outstanding bugs and delivering Quality of Life improvements. We will be getting going with that shortly, after taking care of a few remaining important issues which have been reported in 1.28, including the Trade Company stuttering and save file issues with Expelling minorities. Once we investigate and fix these and other issues, we'll work towards releasing a 1.28.3 Patch.

As we also indicated in last year's wrap-up dev diary, we'll be fairly light on content in these dev diaries for a while, as we take the time both to put together a 1.28.3 Patch and plan out our large end of year Expansion. Frankly put: there isn't the content in the game to be talking about right now, so instead I'll turn attention to how I invited everyone to bring forward longstanding bugs and QoL issues they would like to see taken care of in said expansion. I'll grab some interesting ones and give some thoughts on them.

I'll say ahead of time that these are just thoughts on matters, and not to be taken as firm promises of things to come.

Mothballed Armies

This is something that gets suggested frequently and on one level, it makes nice symmetric sense: One can mothball Navies, why not armies? It will continue not to be implemented however, as while navies serve a variety of roles, including piracy, anti-piracy, trade, transport and combat, your armies serve almost entirely the exclusive role of combat. The ability to mothball parts of your armies would trivialize the cost of maintaining a large army, granting large nations even further advantages.

There are other approaches to this with ideas like higher costs for far flung armies: It could/should be more expensive to operate the Dutch armies in China than in the Netherlands. Such things are not on the cards currently, but make interesting food for thought.

Mod tweaks in the Launcher

I love this idea. Giving more information and flexibility with mods in the launcher would be extremely useful in games with such extensive mod communities as ours, and is certainly something worth exploring how to do right.

Diplomatic Macro Builder

There have been various suggestions for the Diplo Macro since its debut in Mandate of Heaven, not limited to those in the linked thread. Most of them revolve around not correctly targeting who the player is intending, with users not wanting it to target nations who they will soon destroy, or other particular sets of nations such as HRE members/Electors. These were out of the scope when the feature was being made, but as we re-visit parts of the game with QoL in mind, an actual custom list that the player can make at will is an interesting solution for this.

Provide options for subjects colonising regions, to stop them from colonising provinces you want to colonise.

For the precise map painters among us, I've seen this pop up. Colonial Nation subjects currently have some strict rules on lands which their AI will colonize, but I believe there's room for improvement there, where it can be loosened up but give the overlord the ability force colonization within their Colonial Region, so that, for example, Mexico doesn't snake their way into Louisiana and the Eastern Seaboard.

In the coming weeks until we start digging into more meat of what we're planning on doing in our big expansion this year, we'll likely pick up on various other suggestions that have been coming up, as well as a so far unannounced surprise that will be coming in a couple of weeks.
 
Last edited:
Yeah defenitely. Jake had put a teaser on twitter yesterday.
But being on time like last year isn't in his newyears resolutions:p
I remember The Johan posting them around 7 sometimes.
 
Again AI war declaration / military access:

I´m playing in India / Southeast Asia.

Croatia declares war on Spain - or vice versa - but the first thing they do is asking me for military access because Spain has an Island in South-East Asia. I mean military access won´t help - they need a boat anyway. But I guess they loose the war before they reach it anyway. For 0,2% warscore - instead of focusing on Italy / Iberia - or defending. But ok - a bit sightseeing is always nice. Everytime a nation, which has some Trade Company in South-East Asia, is involved in a war I get such requests. Brabant vs. GB, Provence vs. Portugal. It´s just the other end of the world. There´s not much to get - and the real war takes place somewhere else. Ah - ok - and I again had it that Russia declared on Moldavia while their troops are in China - but they won. Moldavia hadn´t enough manpower...

I declare on Ottomans - i´m allied to Tondo which I called in because Ottomans are allied to Malacca. Ottomans also have three Trade Companies in South-East Asia. I send my fleet so Tondo won´t have to fear Malacca - which I took out by land also - but i don´t have any transport ships. Tondo sends his troops to Arabia. Of course they were unhappy after the war. I promised them land - I had those three Provinces directly next to them in mind - which they could reach by foot - but I can´t give those to them in a peace deal if they aren´t occupied. I just needed those two trade companies in India they bough relatively early...

I declare on an random Nation - after the first battle every neighboring Country which don´t have a truce with them is declaring on it - nobody peaces out, because I have all Castles and the Capital. I mean a somewhat aggressive AI is nice - but those things lead to endless wars, because nobody gets either enough warscore or the provinces they want. So I have to declare on everybody else - just to get those provinces - and keep the war rather short. If it is just an AI war it´s not unlikely that everybody ends up with no manpower - so more declarations on them - because they fight those rebels - which are stronger. Hmm - probably I should switch to very hard, but that´s just one point.

There has to be some solution that the AI not chooses the most far away thing they know as "important". I mean I have three choices as Tondo. I could occupy the province next to me which belongs to the Ottomans - no one in sight - I could help my ally fighting Malacca (46k men) who is present there with 100k men, so it´s also just about occupying provinces - or I could send all my troops to Arabia in which my ally is already present with 100k men + 100k men a bit north of it + the other ally (Russia) with 200k men from the north, because I immediately declared after they were finished with Moldavia - and payed of their debts. But the Ottomans with their allies are there too - with about 300k men. As Tondo I have 30k men. So what to do? Just occupying provinces - for warscore - and the land I got promised? Or something - let´s say - unexpected? Like getting wrecked by that ally of the Ottomans from the South? Why always the most far away thing? You could do that after You are finished with those goals directly next to You. And it´s not about that I could set an objective as a player - If the AI is on it´s own in their own wars - that won´t help. Probably the best choice would have been option 4 - doing nothing. Less losses - but exactly the same amount of help.

Nonetheless - the AI is somewhat ok. Just needs a bit polishing - no? I like it that they keep their troops more or less together. Just need to say something else - for the balance.
 
Please fix charter company. Every nation which get at least 792 money try that. Only Great Powers must access charter company action. Otherwise papal states in africa, ottomans in india etc.
 
Please fix charter company. Every nation which get at least 792 money try that. Only Great Powers must access charter company action. Otherwise papal states in africa, ottomans in india etc.
Having Exploration ideas unlocking those features would be a better option.

Honestly, colonization ideas could use a different approach.
Instead of dividing it into Exploration (allows discovery and colonization) and Expansion (allows much faster colonization) which pretty much rely on eachother and most colonial nations take both anyway, there should be two different approaches to colonization, based on the Spanish/French model and the Portuguese/Dutch model, and defined two different colonization strategies.

Exploration ideas (based on colonizing Africa and Indonesia, and maximizing trade steer back home, for the Portuguese and Dutch)

1 Enables Recruitment of Explorers and Conquistadors. Enables fabricating claims overseas in trade regions

2 +60% Exploration range

3 + 1 Colonist

4 + 25 Settler increase

5 -20% Trade charter improvement cost (new modifier)

6 -25% Center of trade upgrade cost
-50% Fort mantainance on border with rival

7 +1 Merchant

A: +15% Global trade power
Can explore in deep ocean tiles

Expansion ideas (based on colonizing America and maximizing colonial nations potential, for Spain and France)

1 Can recruit Explorers and Conquistadors
Can explore in deep ocean tiles

2 + 40% colonization range

3 +1 Colonist

4 +15 Settler growth
-25% Minority expulsion cost

5 +15% Naval size

6 +1 Colonist
5% settler growth

7 +10% Global Tariffs
-20% Envoy travel time

A: Can fabricate claims in overseas trade company regions
+5 number of states

Nations like Great Brittain, should take both.
 
Last edited:
They could move it to a quantity vs quality style thing and make them mutually exclusive (maybe repurpose the professionalism bar into a Quality vs Quantity slider. Quality gets the usual professionalism bonuses while quantity gets economic bonuses based on it's current manpower relative to maximum and how far towards quantity they are due to being able to use those extra potential soldiers to boost the national economy in various ways) and make disbanding troops return manpower to the pool if done in owned territory. (disbanding troops pushes you towards quantity, drilling pushes you towards quality. Each quality idea gives you a permanent +5 points towards quality and each quantity idea pushes you 5 points towards quantity)

If you're quantity focused your troops build really quickly based on how far you've gone in that direction and are cheaper to buy but cost more to maintain (since their cheap equipment needs to be replaced more often), so you have to basically disband most of your army when not at war. (at maximum Quantity focus you could mobilize new regiments at merc speed and 1/4 base cost, but would pay merc levels of base upkeep per soldier)

Quality on the other hand has reduced upkeep (due to better quality equipment) but builds more slowly and costs more upfront due to better starting gear and training.

Thus a qauntity focused nation would disband their army down to a token defense force and then mobilize up quickly during war times, while a quality force would simply keep it's army standing at all times.
 
I dislike the idea behind that, because it gives a two-fold buff to colonisation. First you make any of these standalone idea group vastly better, and second you enhance the power of the combination.

There's a balancing issue with the way you put things. Right now, exploration ideas are in a good situation: they're good, really good, when they are relevant. So I don't think a buff is needed at all. For expansion it's a bit different, but rather than making them mirror exploration ideas I think it'd be better to have them give a mix of colonial and, well, expansionist, ideas. I'm thinking 10% CCR and added states too. Just to give a hint of the balance I'm thinking of, I think explo would already be okay with

1 Enables Recruitment of Explorers and Conquistadors.
2 +20% Exploration range
3 + 1 Colonist
4 + 10 Settler increase
5 -10% Center of trade upgrade cost
6 -25% Fort mantainance on border with rival
7 +1 Merchant
A: +5% Global trade power
without even touching the type of bonuses.
 
I dislike the idea behind that, because it gives a two-fold buff to colonisation. First you make any of these standalone idea group vastly better, and second you enhance the power of the combination.

There's a balancing issue with the way you put things. Right now, exploration ideas are in a good situation: they're good, really good, when they are relevant. So I don't think a buff is needed at all. For expansion it's a bit different, but rather than making them mirror exploration ideas I think it'd be better to have them give a mix of colonial and, well, expansionist, ideas. I'm thinking 10% CCR and added states too. Just to give a hint of the balance I'm thinking of, I think explo would already be okay with

1 Enables Recruitment of Explorers and Conquistadors.
2 +20% Exploration range
3 + 1 Colonist
4 + 10 Settler increase
5 -10% Center of trade upgrade cost
6 -25% Fort mantainance on border with rival
7 +1 Merchant
A: +5% Global trade power
without even touching the type of bonuses.
I understand what you mean, but to be fair i didn't really "buff" them, as much as reorganize the order of the ideas they already had and switch some within groups (with the exception two-folding colonization range, and exploring high seas between both ideas, which doesn't seem too relevant and the trade charter improvment cost reduction, which was the only "extra" added by me).
When you claim i made Expansion a mirror of Exploration i disagree, i made Exploration to have several trade related bonus and a higher Exploration range but restricted to the old world while Expansion is more about reaching America, faster colonization, tariffs and extra states. I agree Expansion should have more bonuses unrelated to colonialism and more like CCR or AE reduction, but i didn't want to change vanilla too much.
Maybe changing the navy size by a CCR reduction and increase the extra state number to +10?

On a side note don't consider Exploration "really good" at all after the 1.28 patch.
I used to just take Exploration and skip Expansion when colonizing, but now Expansion is vastly superior to Exploration in every way, the only reason why i don't just skip Exploration is because i can't explore anywhere without Exploration.
 
Last edited:
Uuh yeah sorry if that was unclear when I say mirror I was thinking "it's like exploration, but in this context rather than this one". I don't think it's a good idea, idea groups are supposed to be collaborative. (besides, someone said quantity vs quality… well you can take both)

Well exploration needs diplomatic mana and gives you explorers+conquistadors as well as a chance to spawn colonialism, I think it's not bad at all. The thing is, if you pick exploration when playing as… idk, Papal state, you're playing against your country's strength. So the fact that it was a "good" idea at all previously (which was debatable already) was kind of an issue. My opinion was that it still wasn't, but the idea group would need only a slight buff to be strong regardless of the situation (like Humanist, Diplomatic or Quality let's say). And this is definitely going out of hand because exploration is supposed to be playstyle defining.

Now with the "nerf", it's back in a state where it's inferior, vastly, if you're not using that playstyle, and superior, vastly, if you're using that playstyle (think "no cb wars" vs "colonise, cb and conquest" for instance).

Anyways sorry for rambling that was longer than I wanted it to be :3
 
Please read again my post. I said Every AI which has 792 money they try to charter company in Africa in India etc. Exploration or expansion ideas irrelevant for this post. Papal State didn't research exploration or expansion. And he has a charter company in africa. Then other AI's followed him. Papa got lost Rome. And it's new capital in Kongo. It makes a lot of sense to you I understand but for me it's a wonderful(!) thing.
 
Last edited:
Having Exploration ideas unlocking those features would be a better option.

Honestly, colonization ideas could use a different approach.
Instead of dividing it into Exploration (allows discovery and colonization) and Expansion (allows much faster colonization) which pretty much rely on eachother and most colonial nations take both anyway, there should be two different approaches to colonization, based on the Spanish/French model and the Portuguese/Dutch model, and defined two different colonization strategies.

Exploration ideas (based on colonizing Africa and Indonesia, and maximizing trade steer back home, for the Portuguese and Dutch)

1 Enables Recruitment of Explorers and Conquistadors. Enables fabricating claims overseas in trade regions

2 +60% Exploration range

3 + 1 Colonist

4 + 25 Settler increase

5 -20% Trade charter improvement cost (new modifier)

6 -25% Center of trade upgrade cost
-50% Fort mantainance on border with rival

7 +1 Merchant

A: +15% Global trade power
Can explore in deep ocean tiles

Expansion ideas (based on colonizing America and maximizing colonial nations potential, for Spain and France)

1 Can recruit Explorers and Conquistadors
Can explore in deep ocean tiles

2 + 40% colonization range

3 +1 Colonist

4 +15 Settler growth
-25% Minority expulsion cost

5 +15% Naval size

6 +1 Colonist
5% settler growth

7 +10% Global Tariffs
-20% Envoy travel time

A: Can fabricate claims in overseas trade company regions
+5 number of states

Nations like Great Brittain, should take both.

Hey dude what is your problem? Are you high or something? Fellow up here is talking about how charter company is exceeding its limit and should be fixed. But you started to explain the colonization strategy :) Thanks for clarification but that's not the point.
 
Please fix charter company. Every nation which get at least 792 money try that. Only Great Powers must access charter company action. Otherwise papal states in africa, ottomans in india etc.
Ottomans start as great power...
But following this "talking about how charter company is exceeding its limit" - why not combine it. Two ideas: First make it exclusively a policy in which You need either expansion or exploration and in either way trade. Or perhaps economy and trade - or diplomatic and trade. Perhaps diplomatic and trade would make most sense - but with exploration/expansion it should be sure, that only real colonizers buy and charter a company. So not every nation with 792 ducats could buy such a province. Second: most of the time the next thing after buying a trade company would be that the nation will declare war on that minor who sold the province. If that happens - give those countries a big malus in the opinions of all trade company nations - all. So they can´t just buy the next province and do the same in China - or elsewhere. Or - third idea I didn´t think about before: After buying a province You have a really long truce with that nation. 30 years - 50 years. No Clou. Which could also be a cooldown timer for buying another province. Forth idea - while writing - make this feature exclusively for the last years of the game. No clou again. Perhaps starting at 1750. Five: restrict it to specific countries. Six: Only sell provinces to countries which haven´t started a war the last 30 years. Seven: Get rid of that feature altogether. Eight: make it more expensive. Nine: You need more relation with them. Let´s say at least 150 - 190. Ten - to make it complete: Any other idea which ends the "exceeding the limits". Eleven - to unbalance it again: If You buy that province - erm - charter that company - You automatically have an alliance with that nation. For at least the said 30 years. Or You are guaranteeing the independence of them + automatic knowledge sharing. Something like that - anything which takes a diplo slot - and anything with a more or less real use for the AI. The AI can´t handle money anyway. But having some European nation as ally would be nice - they just don´t have to tell their rivals that it´s an AI nation which probably can´t get any ships/troops there if they aren´t a colonizer anyway.

I mean sometimes it´s really ridiculous to see that all coastal provinces in Africa and Asia are owned by some different European country. Why do those countries even sell their only coastal province? That should/could also be restricted. That 8 province nation selling three provinces in a row. To Austria, to Netherlands and to Ottomans. Then Austria declares war on them. Two months later Netherlands - then Ottomans. They win vs Austria and Netherlands, because they can´t get any troops there - but Ottomans succeed to get a stack there - and they have to cede a province to them. Next month Ottomans buy a province of their neighbor. Austria also. And Savoy - or did Savoy charter a company of them, because they had so good experiences with Europeans? I´m not sure.
 
Ottomans start as great power...
But following this "talking about how charter company is exceeding its limit" - why not combine it. Two ideas: First make it exclusively a policy in which You need either expansion or exploration and in either way trade. Or perhaps economy and trade - or diplomatic and trade. Perhaps diplomatic and trade would make most sense - but with exploration/expansion it should be sure, that only real colonizers buy and charter a company. So not every nation with 792 ducats could buy such a province. Second: most of the time the next thing after buying a trade company would be that the nation will declare war on that minor who sold the province. If that happens - give those countries a big malus in the opinions of all trade company nations - all. So they can´t just buy the next province and do the same in China - or elsewhere. Or - third idea I didn´t think about before: After buying a province You have a really long truce with that nation. 30 years - 50 years. No Clou. Which could also be a cooldown timer for buying another province. Forth idea - while writing - make this feature exclusively for the last years of the game. No clou again. Perhaps starting at 1750. Five: restrict it to specific countries. Six: Only sell provinces to countries which haven´t started a war the last 30 years. Seven: Get rid of that feature altogether. Eight: make it more expensive. Nine: You need more relation with them. Let´s say at least 150 - 190. Ten - to make it complete: Any other idea which ends the "exceeding the limits". Eleven - to unbalance it again: If You buy that province - erm - charter that company - You automatically have an alliance with that nation. For at least the said 30 years. Or You are guaranteeing the independence of them + automatic knowledge sharing. Something like that - anything which takes a diplo slot - and anything with a more or less real use for the AI. The AI can´t handle money anyway. But having some European nation as ally would be nice - they just don´t have to tell their rivals that it´s an AI nation which probably can´t get any ships/troops there if they aren´t a colonizer anyway.

I mean sometimes it´s really ridiculous to see that all coastal provinces in Africa and Asia are owned by some different European country. Why do those countries even sell their only coastal province? That should/could also be restricted. That 8 province nation selling three provinces in a row. To Austria, to Netherlands and to Ottomans. Then Austria declares war on them. Two months later Netherlands - then Ottomans. They win vs Austria and Netherlands, because they can´t get any troops there - but Ottomans succeed to get a stack there - and they have to cede a province to them. Next month Ottomans buy a province of their neighbor. Austria also. And Savoy - or did Savoy charter a company of them, because they had so good experiences with Europeans? I´m not sure.

Yeah good explanation. With the current condition, charter company doesn't seem realistic. I don't say completely remove charter company but needs some restrictions. The people who disagree my statements, please expose yourself and tell the reason why. I seem recruit here but I played this game for 2.400 hours on steam check my profile (https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198282685887/). The thing I am talking about is not bullshit so please firslty respect my feedback and understand.