• 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 - 1st of November 2016

Hi everyone, and welcome to another development diary for Europa Universalis IV. This time its rather meaty and is about major gameplay changes for the 1.19 patch.

While we were reasonably happy with how Fort and Zone of Control has played out since introduced over a year ago, it has had one major drawback. The rules have so many cases to keep track of that it was practically impossible to make all cases clear to the player. This causes much confusion amongst players, who also had an experience that was not as great as they had hoped while playing.

So now Zone of Control have changed completely. Instead of affecting a province and sometimes blocking passage in adjacent provinces, Zone of Control rules are now area based.

Areas = The same map division that States/Territories are organsied around. And which 1.19 will show thicker borders around.


A Forts is:
  • hostile if it is controlled by someone you are at war with.
  • friendly if it is controlled by you, or by someone on your side in any war, unless you are at war with them (should not happen).
  • neutral otherwise.


An area is:
  • friendly if it has at least one friendly fort and no hostile fort.
  • hostile if it has at least one hostile fort and no friendly fort.
  • contested if it has at least one hostile fort and at least one friendly fort.
  • neutral otherwise.

Zone of Control blocks an army to move between two adjacent provinces if they belong to different areas, one of which is hostile and the other being either hostile or contested.

(Note that movement within areas is never blocked by Zone of Control)

An occupied province without a fort will flip back to its owner's control if there is in the area at least one non-besieged fort controlled by him but no hostile forts.

To ensure an army can always reach the fort that is blocking it from moving and then come back after sieging it down, all armies can ignore Military Access in all non-neutral areas

Rebels never impact hostile rules, and yes, Capital Forts now work like all other forts.

In order to stop the enemy from reaching the interior of your country, you will often need to have one fort in every area.. Even without that though, forts can force the enemy to make detours unless they first siege down some forts.

While doing this, an average country ends up with more forts than before, so maintenance have been halved.

While doing these changes, we have tweaked the map dramatically, adding in lots of wastelands to give natural borders, and also made a big revision to the area setup, so now areas are pretty much all between 3-5 provinces, giving a more even balance.

eu4_131.png





We have added a new peace treaty as well in 1.19, called “End Rivalry”. This peace option force the enemy to remove one of their Rivals. The removed Rival cannot be added again until 15 years after removed.


We play the game quite a lot every week, and read far more on what issues you as players have. So we keep balancing and changing things to make for a greater player experience. In 1.19 we have some rather important changes to how you play the game.

Combat has been changed a bit as well in this patch, as we removed the combat width penalties from terrain, as it made battles last way too long, and was a double defensive bonus combined with diceroll penalties.

Sieging units will no longer get a rivercrossing penalty if a relieving force engages them, even if they did cross a river a few days, months or years earlier.

We have changed the chance to increase colonysize from colonist being placed to instead being a lower the bigger the colony becomes. Previously it was pretty much a no-brainer to keep it as long as possible, as it became better the bigger the colony is. Now íts more of a choice..

Another complaint was the fixed levels of liberty desire that got applied to vassals and marches as they grew past certain arbitrary limits. Now it is scaling by development of the subject so you can always judge impact of their growth.

For those of you that care about score, Great Powers are now likelier to be getting score each month, as they have a default +5 rating in each category. Also maintaining enough forts is now an impact on your military score gain.

Corruption is now not entirely 100% bad, as a country with 100 corruption will now get -20 unrest in their realm.

Courthouse & Town Halls no longer affect unrest but instead reduce state maintainance by 25% and 50% respectively, while their building costs have been halved.

The Casus Belli from Expansion and Exploration Ideagroups did not really work as great as before with the new technology system, so in 1.19 they are getting changed. The Casus Belli themselves are gone..

Exploration Finisher now allows you to fabricate claim on another continent that is in your capital in a colonial region. (Colonial Subjects can do it everywhere in a colonial region.)

Expansion Finisher now allows you to fabricate claims inside any trade company region that is on another continent than your capital. (Without Wealth of Nations, it is any overseas port not in a colonial region, and not in europe.)

At the same time, distance impact on building spy networks have been dropped to 1/10th of before.

For those of you that have Rights of Man, we are now adding even more things. In 1.19, Trade Goods will have a local impact. A Grain Province gives +0.5 Land Force Limit, Iron gives 20% Faster Building Construction & Ivory gives 20% cheaper state maintenance.

We have also improved the “trading in good” - bonus, where some are almost twice as powerful as before, and some have changed completely.

Next week we'll be back talking about all interface improvements for 1.19.
 
  • 239
  • 57
  • 26
Reactions:
Not currently but I'd like to look at that in the future :)
For Denmark many of the early ones relate to the union so those at least wouldn't really make sense...

If somehow the Forum providesa comprehensive list of Events that should work for Scandinavia, would you consider putting the required lines in the files? (should be about 5-10 minutes of c/p work :p)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Fabricating claims on America/Africa/Asia? Do you seriously think that's what the Europeans did? There were no claims, they just went over there and took the land.
Learn some history Paradox.
It's obviously just a way of "fixing" what the patch changed, but it's the dumbest and ahistorical fix i can think of. Oh boy...

@Johan, this 'claims' idea as well as the removal of combat-width province modifiers are bad ideas, bad changes. Please rethink them.

The rest of the post was really good.
 
  • 9
Reactions:
Which tends to be a case of the player abusing the OP policy/idea stacking. I've played a shitload of multiplayer where everyone uses them. You'll never win a 2:1 odds unless your opponents aren't throwing everything in to a battle. And if they are it often comes down to attacking -> retreating for attrition tick -> repeat.
Absolutely not, go watch it.
 
How about getting the opotunity to choose the generals, just like we choose advisors?
Its anoying having to spend 300 military points in order to get 1 disent general.
Im thinking that the generals could be payed out of the Army tradition points direktly, and not payed by monark points.
 
  • 3
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I really dont like that the exploration finisher is being changed from getting a cb against primitives to being able to fabricate a cb on anyone in a colonial region on a continent other than where your capital is. I feel like the finisher should be a cb against all natives (basically any nation with a native tech group, including high american, if i remember correctly natives become high american tech when they reform).
From what I understand, usually the powers that were colonizing in the Americas viewed the natives in the Americas as "soulless Heathens", or "savages" no matter how they "civilized" they were. Look at the Cherokee Nations - They formed their own written language, dressed and acted like Americans, and tried to make any other attempt possible to keep the peace between them and the U.S., but ultimately were still looked down upon as "dirty savages" and were removed from their lands so that the American citizens could move in.
Can someone explain to me why the cb is being made into what it is?
 
  • 4
Reactions:
...if i remember correctly natives become high american tech when they reform).
I don't think it's ever been possible to get High American tech in a game, it's only for converted CKII games with Sunset Invasion, some Random New World fantasy scenarios, and custom nations. Reforming government as a native has never changed tech group (it's separate from westernization, and even that's gone now).
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I will also add my name to the chorus of people who think that expansion and exploration finishers look terrible. The bigger problem is that every Native American nation becomes almost instantly advanced as soon as the colonizer gets nearby. They need to do something to fix that.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
I really dont like that the exploration finisher is being changed from getting a cb against primitives to being able to fabricate a cb on anyone in a colonial region on a continent other than where your capital is. I feel like the finisher should be a cb against all natives (basically any nation with a native tech group, including high american, if i remember correctly natives become high american tech when they reform).
From what I understand, usually the powers that were colonizing in the Americas viewed the natives in the Americas as "soulless Heathens", or "savages" no matter how they "civilized" they were. Look at the Cherokee Nations - They formed their own written language, dressed and acted like Americans, and tried to make any other attempt possible to keep the peace between them and the U.S., but ultimately were still looked down upon as "dirty savages" and were removed from their lands so that the American citizens could move in.
Can someone explain to me why the cb is being made into what it is?
I'm not disagreeing with you about the changes from a game balance perspective. The below is not an attempt to justify this, because I think gameplay trumps history.

That being said: I'd argue from a historical perspective that the CB used against natives in the Americas was generally Deus Vult. Most of the CNs took Religious ideas. After the game's period ends (and many of the natives have been Christianized), the US finished its expansion with a new "Manifest Destiny" CB that it used against Mexico as well.
 
(basically any nation with a native tech group, including high american, if i remember correctly natives become high american tech when they reform).

No, reforming as a native american doesn't change your tech group. They only way to get that is via the CK2 converter, or certain random new world tiles
 
I will also add my name to the chorus of people who think that expansion and exploration finishers look terrible. The bigger problem is that every Native American nation becomes almost instantly advanced as soon as the colonizer gets nearby. They need to do something to fix that.
I'd simply give everyone who has at least 1 colonist and if the province of a native tribe is in colonial range the old finisher CB. It's not like anyone had to have any specific ideas completed to have a reason for killing the natives, so it doesn't make sense to have that as a finisher. As soon as people could colonize, they saw them as nothing more than pesky insects that are occupying precious land. Land, that they want to own.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Where did you hear this? I had heard it was coming out around the second week of November but not specifically tomorrow.

Naturally assumed Tuesday.


Are CBs for Exp and Epl big deals? I don't get Expansion often and do regular CBs because if I'm colonizing and conquering trade company regions I've already gotten Exploration, then Humanism or Religion is a must so riots aren't a problem. Making Expansion another ADM idea that is needed when I start taking over the area.
 
Are CBs for Exp and Epl big deals? I don't get Expansion often and do regular CBs because if I'm colonizing and conquering trade company regions I've already gotten Exploration, then Humanism or Religion is a must so riots aren't a problem. Making Expansion another ADM idea that is needed when I start taking over the area.
Not quite sure what you mean, but you cannot use Exploration or Expansion CBs on the same countries. Exploration CB is for the new world and Expansion CB is for the old world. The Expansion CB is very good, arguably better than Imperialism (more accepted peace terms and lower warscore cost).
 
I don't think it's ever been possible to get High American tech in a game, it's only for converted CKII games with Sunset Invasion, some Random New World fantasy scenarios, and custom nations. Reforming government as a native has never changed tech group (it's separate from westernization, and even that's gone now).
I mentioned the high American because for some reason when I was playing Castille in my ironman mode, around 1503 or so, i was finishing the conquest of Mexico and i got fustrated that my CN released a native nation thanks to rebels. When I went to war to reclaim the lost land and clicked on the province to check the siege progress i noticed they were high American. I am not sure why it happened, i wasnt sure if it was a bug, maybe just my computer because I also noticed there several territories that had the occupied lines running across them even though they werent occupied. I just figured I would include the high Americans just in case
 
@Johan
Hey, I know I'm a bit late to the party but if I could make a suggestion: I don't think combat width should completely disappear. Instead give the defenders a slightly increased combat width on terrain that is considered bad for fighting (e.g. hills, mountains, forests, swamps) and the defenders have GOOD knowledge of it. So at least one of the defending armies is fighting on their own land. Or one of the defending generals involved in the battle is from the country where the battle is taking place. History is littered with freedom-fighting guerillas pitted against far superior forces and winning because of the terrain and their knowledge of it, from the Greeks fighting the Franks and Turks in mountains and swamps, to the Scottish fighting the English in Highlands. This would at least partly simulate the effectiveness of people defending their country on favorable terrain against enemy invaders. It would also make places like the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Alps a lot harder to invade, which they were in real life, despite being surrounded by powerful empires.
 
@Johan
Hey, I know I'm a bit late to the party but if I could make a suggestion: I don't think combat width should completely disappear. Instead give the defenders a slightly increased combat width on terrain that is considered bad for fighting (e.g. hills, mountains, forests, swamps) and the defenders have GOOD knowledge of it.

The trouble with this idea is that, currently, combat width is not separate for each side in combat, but determined by the side that has larger combat width.

But aside from the necessary changes in implementation for that, it's not a bad suggestion.
 
@Johan
Hey, I know I'm a bit late to the party but if I could make a suggestion: I don't think combat width should completely disappear. Instead give the defenders a slightly increased combat width on terrain that is considered bad for fighting (e.g. hills, mountains, forests, swamps) and the defenders have GOOD knowledge of it. So at least one of the defending armies is fighting on their own land. Or one of the defending generals involved in the battle is from the country where the battle is taking place. History is littered with freedom-fighting guerillas pitted against far superior forces and winning because of the terrain and their knowledge of it, from the Greeks fighting the Franks and Turks in mountains and swamps, to the Scottish fighting the English in Highlands. This would at least partly simulate the effectiveness of people defending their country on favorable terrain against enemy invaders. It would also make places like the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Alps a lot harder to invade, which they were in real life, despite being surrounded by powerful empires.
But that only helps defenders who are larger than attackers, it doesn't help smaller defending armies, which have always benefited greatly from combat width reductions from terrain.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
I mentioned the high American because for some reason when I was playing Castille in my ironman mode, around 1503 or so, i was finishing the conquest of Mexico and i got fustrated that my CN released a native nation thanks to rebels. When I went to war to reclaim the lost land and clicked on the province to check the siege progress i noticed they were high American. I am not sure why it happened, i wasnt sure if it was a bug, maybe just my computer because I also noticed there several territories that had the occupied lines running across them even though they werent occupied. I just figured I would include the high Americans just in case
Oh, that's interesting. And weird. As far as I know that shouldn't be happening. You don't happen to have a screenshot, do you? Seems like either a bug or an undocumented change.