• 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 - 18th of June 2019

Hello and good morning. Today we will finally unveil our long-anticipated changes to the map and political setup of the Balkans, as well as taking a look at Austria. This will be our final dev diary on map changes for the European update.

As befits the fragmented nature of the Balkans, today’s dev diary will be divided into three parts, each written by a member of the Content Design team who personally worked on each region.

dd_greece.png


I’ll begin with my own work on Greece and Bulgaria. You’ll notice that province density has noticeably increased, but rest assured we have taken care to avoid adding a net development boost to the Ottomans. We feel that their current level of development makes them a sufficiently powerful force, and any further advantages would harm the experience for players in their vicinity.

We’ve split the Bulgaria area in two, with most of Bulgaria remaining in “Bulgaria” but with the east in the new Silistria area. Bulgaria in total has gained 3 new provinces: Tolcu, split from Silistre, allows for a more accurate Ottoman-Moldavian border. Tirnovo, once a major cultural, military, and economic center for the Bulgarian Empire, declined under Ottoman rule but remained a thorn in the side of the Turks as it was a hotbed for Bulgarian resistance. Finally, Kyustendil/Kostendil was the center of an Ottoman sanjak and an exploitable mining site.

Thrace and Macedonia have also been updated with new provinces. Edirne has lost its access to the sea to the new province of Gelibolu/Gallipoli, home to a mighty fortress and naval arsenal. Parts of the former Edirne have also been added to the new Gumulcine province. Lastly, Selanik is now confined to the area around the city of Thessaloniki, as Siroz now occupies the outer reaches.

Moving down into Greece proper, a new nation has appeared while another is notable by its absence. Epirus, with its capital in the new province of Arta, is ruled by the Tocco dynasty who for whatever reason were previously represented as the rulers of the Venetian vassal-state of Corfu. Corfu no longer exists in 1444, but it retains its core on the island. Epirus also rules the island of Cephalonia, which has been separated from the Corfu province and gives Epirus the ability to produce wine. Fans of Byzantium will be pleased to hear that they now possess an additional province at the start of the game, based around the historic city of Corinth. And in the Aegean Sea, Lesbos has been split from Scio - Lesbos has a strait connection to Biga while Scio connects to Sugla.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

dd_austria.jpg


I'm @Caligula Caesar, and I'm here to tell you about our changes to Austria. Now, some of you may be aware that there is a good case for splitting Austria in three at the start of the game and requiring them to unify their territories. However, as a team we elected NOT to do this. Our reasoning is simple: For an enjoyable and challenging game on continental Europe, it is necessary for there to be a strong Austria. As Austria is already one of the more vulnerable superpowers in the early game, making their starting position significantly weaker by reducing their directly held territories by 2/3 would simply not make a better game experience.

We felt that Austria's starting development was fine as it was, but its province density was not quite at the level we wanted, so we added some new provinces by splitting existing provinces' development. As we have already shown, Tirol was split between Inntal and Etschtal and South Tirol became Trent, now an independent tag; also, some impassable mountains were added between Tirol and Venetia. Moving east, we split Kärnten in two between Oberkärnten/Villach and Unterkärnten/Klagenfurt. In the north, Linz's province (now known as Oberenns) was reshaped significantly and room was made for Traungau (with the significant ironworking town of Steyr as its capital) to the south of it. Wien province, too, has been split, with Wienerwald/Sankt Pölten taking its place to the west.

Finally, in the south, we added the Slovene culture. This culture is present in Görz, Krain and Celje. The last of those is owned by a new tag, the Counts of Cilli - known by their German name as its rulers were the German von Cilli family (the tag itself retains Slovene culture, however, and has some dynamic province names for surrounding areas).

Now on to @Ofaloaf 's work on the Western Balkans:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

dd_serbia.jpg


This work owes a tremendous amount to @otaats and his suggestions in Serbia & friends, which (in a truncated form) served as an inspiration. I also want to give a shoutout to @Wokeg, whose enthusiasm for the region and its history has been an excellent inspiration and motivation.

Most of the mapwork simply provides greater provincial fidelity, but there are some significant changes and additions. Starting with the smaller stuff, Venetian holdings along the Adriatic coast are better defined, with old Dalmatian province now split between Zara and Spalato and Cattaro now spun off from the province of Zeta. Albania also gets a second province, Krüje, which was one of the strongholds of the Albanian ruler Skanderbeg. Fortified and mountainous, Krüje should be a real pain to crack early in the game.

One of the most major additions to the region is the inclusion of Herzegovina. It's a relatively new state in 1444, being largely the creation of Stjepan Vukčić, who inherited those lands in 1435. Stjepan was an incredibly ambitious nobleman who took on the title of herceg (borrowed from German herzog) and ruled a portion of the Kingdom of Bosnia as a de facto independent realm called the Duchy of Saint Sava, which is the name its contemporaries knew it as. While Stjepan had the chops for independent rule, his sons weren't quite as canny, and in 1483 the realm was conquered by advancing Ottoman forces. However, Stjepan's title, herceg, lived on in the Ottoman name for the territory, and this eventually became the name Herzegovina, which is what we know the area now as and, for the sake of familiarity, the name which the realm (and its capital province) is called in-game.

You may have also noticed that Croatia is now present on the map. It starts in a union under Hungary, and depending on Hungarian fortunes may now either break away in one fell swoop or be more firmly incorporated into the Crown of St. Stephen. While the inclusion of Croatia does provide some interesting opportunities for Hungarian expansion or wresting parts of the Hungarian domain away from Budapest, the inclusion of Croatia as a separate entity has called for a little historical fudging. Rule of Croatia and Slavonia was split in 1444, although the two entities were ruled by Croatian brothers at the time of the Grand Campaign, and the titles would be merged together into a united Banate in 1476. To prevent Hungarian diplomatic relations from being eaten up by subjects and give it a slightly more powerful vassal to keep in check, Croatia here is unified slightly early.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you all for reading this and our other map-based dev diaries, it’s been a pleasure to present our work to you and to read your feedback and ideas. Next week we will take a look at some of the new mission trees coming to this region - most likely Austria, one of the Balkan minors, and something you might not expect. We’ll also talk a little about the Hungarian succession. Until then, have a great week!
 
  • 2Love
Reactions:
I have been following the dev diaries since the 'major expansion' has been released and it's what I was worried it was gonna be - just more provinces and mission trees. No new mechanics.
I'm sorry, but did you even read the diary before complaining? This diary explicitly mentioned they will start revealing the major reworks and features after the summer. It's easy to complain but difficult to be constructive.
 
This may be a little bit of a nitpick, but during the Siege of Constantinople in 1453 Constantine XI took part in the battle till his death. Could he be implemented as a starting general, or possibly an event? Would this be a viable option?
 
Will the Byzantines maintain their cores on mainland Greece? If so, does this make Epirus an easy target early game for any of its neighbors?(excluding the Ottoman truce i'm assuming)
 
Also i wanted to suggest, could you add Dalmatian culture. Provinces that are under control of Venice as well as Ragusa itself should be Dalmatian. Dalmatian was Romance language you have more about them here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalmatian_language

The main issue is the size of provinces, I mean, while the cities like Capodistria, Umago, Parenzo, Rovigno, Pola, Zara, Trau, Sebenico, Spalatto, Castelnuovo, Cattaro or the proper Ragusa until the earthquake, were preeminently Italian, the countryside was mainly slavic.

EU4 doesn't admit mixed pops, so Istria should be Friulian, Zara and Spalato could be Dalmatian instead Croatian, but Cattaro should be serbian orthodox and Ragusa Croatian/Serbian catholic, while the RAG tag should be Dalmatian with Croatian/Serbian as accepted.

Without more provinces in Venezia Giulia and Dalmatia is difficult to reflect this, as we're speaking about a ratio 40/60 Italian-Slavic, with Italian preeminence in the litoral.
 
The main issue is the size of provinces, I mean, while the cities like Capodistria, Umago, Parenzo, Rovigno, Pola, Zara, Trau, Sebenico, Spalatto, Castelnuovo, Cattaro or the proper Ragusa until the earthquake, were preeminently Italian, the countryside was mainly slavic.

EU4 doesn't admit mixed pops, so Istria should be Friulian, Zara and Spalato could be Dalmatian instead Croatian, but Cattaro should be serbian orthodox and Ragusa Croatian/Serbian catholic, while the RAG tag should be Dalmatian with Croatian/Serbian as accepted.

Without more provinces in Venezia Giulia and Dalmatia is difficult to reflect this, as we're speaking about a ratio 40/60 Italian-Slavic, with Italian preeminence in the litoral.

Well, you do have point about that. I just thought that it would be cool to add extra Italian culture (Dalamtian) like in MEIOU and Taxes. Me personally would like that. Italians are cool. But hey,I'm not against majority :)
 
Well, you do have point about that. I just thought that it would be cool to add extra Italian culture (Dalamtian) like in MEIOU and Taxes. Me personally would like that. Italians are cool. But hey,I'm not against majority :)


Yes, but there are a lot of people against little provinces as they will not can do World Conquest. As these achievements had any importance, or at least more than historical plausibility.
 
Well more like small cultures are ultimately kind of detrimental to gameplay. It's not a World Conquest thing, it's a general thing.

Say for example I'm playing Cherokee (because I am right now). There's three provinces that are Cherokee culture. There's if I remember like 6 total "Cultural Group" provinces with the Iroquois and a few others. Meaning every other province I ever claim in warfare is going to be Red and penalizing me. There's only so many cultural groups you can promote of course. Meaning there's effectively this tax on either Monarch Points or potential Income, Manpower (which is already poor in the region), etc, to convert it.

Compared to say if I'm playing France. Where overall I'll have much more development as Primary Culture and Same Cultural Group. And promoting a culture has far more impact as opposed to the 1-3 of my neighbors in the Cherokee run or the eventual 5-6 or so of Colonial Nations I kick over before they spread too far for me to stomp (which would be even worse if I got that terrible Golden Century and Colonial Nations ended up some insane hodge podge of cultures).

But yeah. Just why in terms of gameplay I can see not creating a ton of unique, small cultures. It's one of those invisible penalties that harms midrange players (like Territorial Corruption) and really has minimal impact from the look of things on the World Conquest sort of players (Annoying, but doesn't stop them, just forces a reordering of their tasks).

Not to mention also pushing Humanist even more (already a/the top Admin Idea Group) for more accepted cultures as well as religious tolerance where the move should be towards making Religious, Economic, and Innovative more viable compared to Humanist, Administrative, and Expansion.
 
Well more like small cultures are ultimately kind of detrimental to gameplay. It's not a World Conquest thing, it's a general thing.

Say for example I'm playing Cherokee (because I am right now). There's three provinces that are Cherokee culture. There's if I remember like 6 total "Cultural Group" provinces with the Iroquois and a few others. Meaning every other province I ever claim in warfare is going to be Red and penalizing me. There's only so many cultural groups you can promote of course. Meaning there's effectively this tax on either Monarch Points or potential Income, Manpower (which is already poor in the region), etc, to convert it.

Compared to say if I'm playing France. Where overall I'll have much more development as Primary Culture and Same Cultural Group. And promoting a culture has far more impact as opposed to the 1-3 of my neighbors in the Cherokee run or the eventual 5-6 or so of Colonial Nations I kick over before they spread too far for me to stomp (which would be even worse if I got that terrible Golden Century and Colonial Nations ended up some insane hodge podge of cultures).

But yeah. Just why in terms of gameplay I can see not creating a ton of unique, small cultures. It's one of those invisible penalties that harms midrange players (like Territorial Corruption) and really has minimal impact from the look of things on the World Conquest sort of players (Annoying, but doesn't stop them, just forces a reordering of their tasks).

Not to mention also pushing Humanist even more (already a/the top Admin Idea Group) for more accepted cultures as well as religious tolerance where the move should be towards making Religious, Economic, and Innovative more viable compared to Humanist, Administrative, and Expansion.
Eh limited accepted cultures is along with the limited number of states one of the few brakes on snowballing. Because it means your newly acquired provinces will never be as productive for you as they would have been to the original owner. This is a very real issue for real life empires, in fact often enough empires have found that their conquests have not only gained them what they thought they would be have in fact been a drain on their resources. And unfortunately that is not represented in the game, every province conquered will always make you stronger.

In fact its why trade is a thing, because the local powers have a comparative advantage to holding that land and trading the resources found there compared to someone from afar holding it and trying to exploit it.
 
Last edited:
Well more like small cultures are ultimately kind of detrimental to gameplay. It's not a World Conquest thing, it's a general thing.

Because it costs just 100 dip power, for any culture. There is no scaling cost involved whatsoever and penalty for demoting is kinda weak, which makes you neglect small regional cultures in favor of accepting ultrahuge ones - like Muscovite for example - at the same cost as Gothic or Maltese. Which is absurd.
 
Because it costs just 100 dip power, for any culture. There is no scaling cost involved whatsoever and penalty for demoting is kinda weak, which makes you neglect small regional cultures in favor of accepting ultrahuge ones - like Muscovite for example - at the same cost as Gothic or Maltese. Which is absurd.
On the contrary through history conquering powers have usually partnered with a small number of local cultures and helped them promote homogeneity in their region.
 
On the contrary through history conquering powers have usually partnered with a small number of local cultures and helped them promote homogeneity in their region.

you don't get it. What's absurd is the scaling (or lack thereof), not the availability of accepting. Accepting doesn't scale in 2 ways:
- You pay upfront 100 dip (before modifiers, but they're rare) to accept a culture, no matter its total dev
- You pay upfront 1 culture slot to accept, no matter its total dev

I hope the misunderstanding is cleared :l
 
Well, that and more my point is that if I was on a World Conquest train, the Cultural Penalties for non-acceptance doesn't matter. I'd snowball either way and just bother accepting the cultures with the most development (and demote smaller ones as needed). It's not really an obstacle. It's only really an obstacle to people who aren't on that train where the ding matters more.

I just thought it was weird because the comment I was replying to was framed up as the reason small, tiny cultures like Dalmatian didn't exist was because it'd punish World Conquest when I think it's quite the opposite. It's more likely to punish people playing the smaller regional game. Something highlighted during a New World run because you have so many 1 province cultures (nearly every tribe) with the largest being Iroquois at 4 and a couple of 2 and 3s. It's a bigger handicap there than it ever is if say, I'm playing the Ottomans. Who cares if Iberian cultures don't accept me? I've turned the Med into a Muslim Lake to abuse a phrase (as came up in my "Unify Islam" run) and the reduced gains and unrest from the culture clash is inconsequential at that point.
 
I'm just gonna toss around a suggestion that comes to mind that could resolve this issue.

The game could maybe keep track of the largest culture^* dev-wise (call it alpha culture), and each "accepted culture" slot would instead be available to hoard as many cultures as you'd want provided their total dev is lower that that of the alpha culture^†. Other restrictions could be implemented^°, and this could also be an opportunity to redesign the humanist acceptance in a more satisfactory manner (maybe: dev threshold improved by 25%?).

* or maybe the largest culture group, or the largest culture/c-group of that nation, and/or only land owned. Rewarding in some cases owning a large unified culture/c-group, in other belonging to one, or lastly rewarding someone else culture converting.
† or a fraction thereof, probably 50% looks like a decent threshold.
° You could for instance be restricted for each slot to be devoted to a culture group, that way you'd be able to effectively accept (smaller) culture groups if you meet the requirements, but not 2 unrelated cultures.

edit: I'm not gonna post it in the suggestion forum because I'm unconvinced of the potential, but if you are convinced feel free to post it yourself (possibly after working out the details)
 
Last edited:
I just thought it was weird because the comment I was replying to was framed up as the reason small, tiny cultures like Dalmatian didn't exist was because it'd punish World Conquest when I think it's quite the opposite. It's more likely to punish people playing the smaller regional game. Something highlighted during a New World run because you have so many 1 province cultures (nearly every tribe) with the largest being Iroquois at 4 and a couple of 2 and 3s. It's a bigger handicap there than it ever is if say, I'm playing the Ottomans. Who cares if Iberian cultures don't accept me? I've turned the Med into a Muslim Lake to abuse a phrase (as came up in my "Unify Islam" run) and the reduced gains and unrest from the culture clash is inconsequential at that point.

Maybe you should read again.

I'm speaking about the number of provinces, not the cultures. Every time more provinces are added, someone cries abut the fact that it will be harder to achieve WC.

And the only real way to separate dalmatian and slavic is to divide the provinces. So you took my post in the wrong sense, a WC player couldn't care less if there are 100 or 200 cultures, as most of the world wouldn't be an accepted one.
 
you don't get it. What's absurd is the scaling (or lack thereof), not the availability of accepting. Accepting doesn't scale in 2 ways:
- You pay upfront 100 dip (before modifiers, but they're rare) to accept a culture, no matter its total dev
- You pay upfront 1 culture slot to accept, no matter its total dev

I hope the misunderstanding is cleared :l
Except that I think diplopoints are a terrible idea I really don't see why accepting a smaller culture would be less work than accepting a large one. In fact quite the opposite.
 
Except that I think diplopoints are a terrible idea I really don't see why accepting a smaller culture would be less work than accepting a large one. In fact quite the opposite.

No?
It means power sharing with different cultures and a larger circle of people, upsetting your current political class and others having political, trade and other advantages. It means less power, less weather for your primary culture.

Imagine British sharing political power with French for example and with Welsh. Which one could be easier to pull off and make your primary culture consider?
 
No?
It means power sharing with different cultures and a larger circle of people, upsetting your current political class and others having political, trade and other advantages. It means less power, less weather for your primary culture.

Imagine British sharing political power with French for example and with Welsh. Which one could be easier to pull off and make your primary culture consider?
Much easier to share power with the french because you could actually sell the idea that sharing power with them to the English nobles while selling them the idea that the welsh are their equals is ludicrous. Also there is a necessity to deal with the issue of the french that simply doesn't exist when it comes to the welsh.

As so much in history it comes down to explaining to people why they stand to lose from not doing what you want. You'd have a much easier time explaining why the french who outnumber them five to one may be given special considerations than the welsh who could easily just be displaced and replaced with good english settlers (like England later did in Ireland).

Not to mention the primary language of the English nobility in 1444 is french and they've all got a cousin in France. Meanwhile is there even such a thing as welsh nobles in 1444? You'd actually have to create anew noble class to make them an equal partner.

And why stop with the french let's look how the british interacted with way larger cultures in their empire about the same time as they were dealing so harshly with the irish, let's look at india. The noble classes of india were maintained in an unequal partnership with the british while the irish nobility essentially ceased to exist and the british set out to assimilate them or replace them. Because it was the only option in india, there were simply to many people there to replace them with british settlers, you had to make allowances for them to control them, at least in the short term.
 
Last edited:
I like the changes, though I have a few suggestions for Bosnia specifically so I hope the devs are still following this thread.

I think the name of Bosnia province should be changed to Usora or Soli, which are historic medieval names for that region. The in-game province is a bit rough, so it's not clear if it should be Usora or Soli (as the actual city Tuzla, then known as Soli is more to the east). However, I would argue for it to be still named Soli (Só in Hungarian) because of the importance of the local salt mines to multiple surrounding states throughout history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soli_(province)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banate_of_Só
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usora_(province)
(I realize wikipedia articles are not the best sources, but I just want to point you in the general direction)
J3Wxatu.png

(Shown above is the spread of Bosnian Kingdom, though I posted it only for the region names.)

My second suggestion would be to consider adding an inland center of trade for the Visoki province. The settlement of Podvisoki was an actual important center of trade at the time, and it could easily be reflected in-game.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visoko_during_the_Middle_Ages#Podvisoki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podvisoki
Pavao Anđelić, Srednji vijek – Doba stare bosanske države, „Visoko i okolina kroz historiju I, Visoko 1984, 160-162 (source used in the wikipedia articles)

My third suggestion would be to keep the Travunia province name (or change it to Hum/Zahumlje) as at that point in time it was known by those names for much longer than Hercegovina (which itself covers a bigger region than the in-game province). On a related note, Stjepan Vukčić Kosača assumed the title "Herzog of Hum and the Coast" in 1448, so 4 years after the starting date in EU4.

Travunia historically also had sea access (which would make sense for Duchy of Saint Sava, seeing as it's capital was Herceg Novi, a sea town).
If the provinces stay landlocked, at least consider changing the name of Hum province to Tropolje or Završje, and Hercegovina province to Hum/Zahumlje, which would be more accurate. (You can see these region names in the image I posted above). Though, understandably, the province shapes and sizes would have to be changed a bit in that case.
 
Last edited: