EU4 - Development Diary - 15th of May 2018

[Martynios]

Just to add to this, note that the British lost their first major war with the Mughals. In Child's War (1686 - 1690), they lost all their possessions in India outside of Calcutta, including even Bombay, to the Mughals. They were only allowed to regain what they lost on Aurangzeb's sufferance and their (obviously quickly broken) promise of good behavior. European conquest of India was by no means preordained, and really only became an option once the Mughals collapsed, and the Europeans become one of several players attempting to fill the vacuum.

Why do people keep bringing this up? The British lost against the Mughals, and later the Marathas. Does that mean India had equal technology? Not necessarily, and by Paradox’s own definition (the historical start dates) they did not. Besides, an in-game more-or-less unified India would always be able to repel even an improved European AI, just by having more development. “The British lost xxx war”, “the British conquered India through diplomacy (really? moving ‘magic euro abilities’ from military strength to diplomacy, as if the Indians didn’t do diplomacy?)” or “the British used Indian soldiers too” are not arguments for the complete lack of tech disparity currently in the game.

EDIT: The same goes for “the Spanish used a lot of native allies”, “the Spanish couldn’t have conquered America as easily without diseases”, “the Spanish never conquered glorious Mapuche”, “the Spanish were just lucky” etc. All true, but no proof of tech parity.

 

[TenshiN]

I imagine how Ming buys off half of Europe with its endless ducats
Glorious feature, makes ROTW even more powerful, 10/10, would buy

 

[SPAMbuca]

Just thought of something. Will the AI consider the additional worth of a province if it comes down to how expensive it would be? For example, is it an estuary or center of trade? Did it perhaps spawn an institution or would it perhaps have an institution (or more) embraced the buyer doesn't have? Are there buildings on the province? Will it cut off someone's land connection?

 

[Afonso de Albuquerque]

Just to add to this, note that the British lost their first major war with the Mughals. In Child's War (1686 - 1690), they lost all their possessions in India outside of Calcutta, including even Bombay, to the Mughals. They were only allowed to regain what they lost on Aurangzeb's sufferance and their (obviously quickly broken) promise of good behavior. European conquest of India was by no means preordained, and really only became an option once the Mughals collapsed, and the Europeans become one of several players attempting to fill the vacuum.

Calling it a major war when there wasn't a single battle of note seems a bit excessive... when you say the British "lost all their possessions" that mostly just amounts to factories/warehouses and captured merchants, the BEIC didn't have that much territory yet, basically only Bombay (not yet very developed) and Madras (I think that's what you meant, Calcutta was established after the war). Not that the outcome of a real fight would be in any doubt, the Mughals were at their zenith and the BEIC, despite technological superiority (especially at sea) was still relatively weak. I agree that if India had been united under a strong empire like Aurangzeb's when the Portuguese first arrived, its history might have gone along more like that of China or Japan, without the major European occupation and colonialism.

 

[qwertzuiop]

Why do people keep bringing this up? The British lost against the Mughals, and later the Marathas. Does that mean India had equal technology? Not necessarily, and by Paradox’s own definition (the historical start dates) they did not. Besides, an in-game more-or-less unified India would always be able to repel even an improved European AI, just by having more development. “The British lost xxx war”, “the British conquered India through diplomacy (really? moving ‘magic euro abilities’ from military strength to diplomacy, as if the Indians didn’t do diplomacy?)” or “the British used Indian soldiers too” are not arguments for the complete lack of tech disparity currently in the game.

EDIT: The same goes for “the Spanish used a lot of native allies”, “the Spanish couldn’t have conquered America as easily without diseases”, “the Spanish never conquered glorious Mapuche”, “the Spanish were just lucky” etc. All true, but no proof of tech parity.

But tech disparity exists in the game. The issue is just that all tech differences get smaller and smaller as time progresses. At the end of the game, the whole world will be on par. At certain points before that, certain areas of the world definitely have a tech disadvantage unless there is some kind of player intervention.

I'm currently playing as Russia and I can attack Bahmanis on mil tech 15 while they are on tech 11 around 1580. That's not a complete lack of tech disparity. I'm not saying the institution system is very intuitive or even historical but don't pretend there is an equal playing field. Also please don't use historical start dates as an argument. I started a game after 1550 and most European countries didn't have colonialism. Would you support to slow down the spread of Colonialism and making most of Europe take a 50% tech penalty just to meet the target set by the historical start date? I guess not.

 

[Res_Ipsa]

This does not look great at all. European nations already have ridiculously ahistorical amounts of African land in a far too quick timeframe. I would bet this happens to India as well. What we really need, given that provinces can only be so small, is the ability to set up CK2-style trading posts, and to make a special form of trade tributary--both of which should enable, in the very very late game, the ability to start actually holding land in India and Africa. This would much better represent what happened.

I suppose it doesn't matter. If there is no fix to the cancerous AI, I'm just going to not buy this and play on 1.22, which was the last time the AI was any good. And I know others are doing the same. Congrats, Paradox--by focusing on adding magic buttons instead of fixing the garbage AI, you're actually losing customers.

 

[Jer.Kaff van Hiderman]

Depends on the AI, the AI will evaluate how many you have near the province you are trying to buy. So it will go "Eh no you already got enough" if you try to buy all of India.

And will the provinces I have bought provide “range” for next purchase and reduce the cost?

 

[Granathar]

I imagine how Ming buys off half of Europe with its endless ducats
Glorious feature, makes ROTW even more powerful, 10/10, would buy

In most of my games Ottomans are way richer than Ming and don't even blob too much. That's more of a problem for Europe.

 

[grandadmiralbob]

I imagine how Ming buys off half of Europe with its endless ducats
Glorious feature, makes ROTW even more powerful, 10/10, would buy

You're joking but I hope the devs take this into account. Although the loss of Mandate from buying Viscaya, and have France and Spain as non-tributaries would be a nice thing, as personally, I have only seen a Mingplosion once or twice since MoH.

 

[Afonso de Albuquerque]

You're joking but I hope the devs take this into account. Although the loss of Mandate from buying Viscaya, and have France and Spain as non-tributaries would be a nice thing, as personally, I have only seen a Mingplosion once or twice since MoH.

You can only buy provinces in Trade Company regions.

 

[Battlex]

You're joking but I hope the devs take this into account. Although the loss of Mandate from buying Viscaya, and have France and Spain as non-tributaries would be a nice thing, as personally, I have only seen a Mingplosion once or twice since MoH.

Mingsplosion always seems to happen when you play a game without intent to go into China
e.g. when I played Tall Mamelukes it happened, but when I go for Relentless Push East or GROB PORTUGAL it never happens.
Hopefully I can threaten war for that one province off Manchu this time

 

[otaats]

I imagine how Ming buys off half of Europe with its endless ducats
Glorious feature, makes ROTW even more powerful, 10/10, would buy

You can only buy provinces in TC regions though

 

[Metz]

Can Trade Companies be made into vassals? The EIC and the VOC had autonomous control over armies, taxes, and administration. You should also not be instantly able to recruit and tax a lot from these provinces as people aren't used to you yet.

 

[TenshiN]

You can only buy provinces in TC regions though

Means i am stupid yet again
Still, a man can dream

 

[Metz]

What about automatic truce when chartering company? It could be abused by making a CB right after getting the province.

 

[Martynios]

But tech disparity exists in the game. The issue is just that all tech differences get smaller and smaller as time progresses. At the end of the game, the whole world will be on par. At certain points before that, certain areas of the world definitely have a tech disadvantage unless there is some kind of player intervention.

I'm currently playing as Russia and I can attack Bahmanis on mil tech 15 while they are on tech 11 around 1580. That's not a complete lack of tech disparity. I'm not saying the institution system is very intuitive or even historical but don't pretend there is an equal playing field.

If you have a 4 tech advantage over Bahmanis as Russia, your game is somewhat exceptional.

These graphs show the average number of military techs nations in a certain region were behind western Europe over the course of four different observer games, from a video by Reman's Paradox. As you can see, the highest average advantage the Europeans get is just under three techs, and that's only for 25-50 years. Before ~1500 and after ~1750, so for about a third of the game, there is an even playing field, and at the end of the game India is actually a little ahead of Europe on average.

Also please don't use historical start dates as an argument. I started a game after 1550 and most European countries didn't have colonialism. Would you support to slow down the spread of Colonialism and making most of Europe take a 50% tech penalty just to meet the target set by the historical start date? I guess not.

Institutions were implemented long after the devs stopped doing serious work on the historical start dates. Technology itself however has remained virtually unchanged since the game came out, so unlike institutions technology is supposed to be somewhat balanced in the start dates.

 

[Metz]

Maybe a better way to simulate the new TC feature is to only allow it to happen if the country wanting the land has X amount of trade power in that region? Why would a country want land where it has no trade presence? It is a large gamble. The British penetrated the Indian markets first before the EIC snatched land in Bengali. X could be any value larger than what the TC original country has in that relative trade node.

 

[AlexandruRadu]

If you have a 4 tech advantage over Bahmanis as Russia, your game is somewhat exceptional.

These graphs show the average number of military techs nations in a certain region were behind western Europe over the course of four different observer games, from a video by Reman's Paradox. As you can see, the highest average advantage the Europeans get is just under three techs, and that's only for 25-50 years. Before ~1500 and after ~1750, so for about a third of the game, there is an even playing field, and at the end of the game India is actually a little ahead of Europe on average.

Institutions were implemented long after the devs stopped doing serious work on the historical start dates. Technology itself however has remained virtually unchanged since the game came out, so unlike institutions technology is supposed to be somewhat balanced in the start dates.

Another thing people forget to keep in mind is that Indian tech has some very nice pips and that just when they start to close the gap in tech, they will also do so in pips having some of the best unit types in the game at that point in time and staying fairly close behind western Europe for the rest of the game. If anything your graph understates just how immense of an effect that change will have on the militaries of the region and the fairly ridiculous roadblocks colonizers will face.

 

[Atlantians]

It will be paid for, but it integrates with the Trade Company mechanic of Wealth of Nations.

What about Protectorates?!

Please bring them back!

 

[Zwirbaum]

If you have a 4 tech advantage over Bahmanis as Russia, your game is somewhat exceptional.

These graphs show the average number of military techs nations in a certain region were behind western Europe over the course of four different observer games, from a video by Reman's Paradox. As you can see, the highest average advantage the Europeans get is just under three techs, and that's only for 25-50 years. Before ~1500 and after ~1750, so for about a third of the game, there is an even playing field, and at the end of the game India is actually a little ahead of Europe on average.

Institutions were implemented long after the devs stopped doing serious work on the historical start dates. Technology itself however has remained virtually unchanged since the game came out, so unlike institutions technology is supposed to be somewhat balanced in the start dates.

Because nothing has changed between now, and 6 Feb of 2017 when Remans video was posted. Like for example the spread of institutions from TC, different AI behaviour, new mechanics etc.