• 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:
Some nice changes and some I'm not too keen on....

1. Arumba's moans about ZOC will only become tears about spending years just doing even more boring sieges of forts. Annoying fort spam is increasing? Will his tears prompt 1.19b?
2. Combat width worked quite well in some cases IMHO - for example early game as Granada when Castille is at war and splits its stacks, you could often win a 9 or 10 vs 15-18 in the mountains. I am presuming that this change means that with the flanking bonus it much less likely? I admit is annoying later in the game with bigger stacks as one fight often sees AI reinforcements crossing 10 provinces to join the mother of all battles, but is that just due to combat width? maybe faster battle ticks would sort that out.
3. I really like Town halls being somewhat useful again, but perhaps you could have them also add -0.01 (or some impact on) monthly corruption?
4. Wastelands and choke point are great, but if you have to rely on just adding more of them to bolster a 'defense' system, then I'd argue the system itself isn't working very well.

The colonial stuff I'm not too experienced with to qualify my opinions.
 
  • 10
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm a bit meh on the combat width changes.

I flat out don't like the cancel rivalry peace option.

The -unrest bonus from corruption is interesting, in a good way.

I hate the change to exploration and expansion finishers. Yes they are wonky in 1.18 but at least you get the discount to province WS cost, AE and no separatism from colonial conquest if I'm not mistaken. The trick in Mexico and Peru is to chain wars together and conquer it all in one series of wars. More difficult with the migrating tribes admittedly but not unsurmountable.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Lots to take in here and I mostly agree with what everyone else is saying. A lot is good, a few parts I want to try for myself before passing judgement, and a couple of eyebrow raisers. There is one bit that nobody else has raised yet, though.

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..

I don't think this is going to work very well for one simple reason: sending colonists just isn't very fun most of the time. Exploring new land can be fun. Trying to get your colonial range high enough to reach across the Atlantic as soon as possible can be fun. Actually having colonies and colonial nations can also be fun. But the actual act of colonising is mostly just fairly boring micro-management.

But it did have one thing going for it: it didn't need a lot of thought or attention. Most of the time, I simply send a colonist off to wherever I want to colonise next, wait until I get the message popping up about a finished colony, then go find somewhere else to colonise, and repeat. Except when I'm actively sending colonists I mostly just forget about them and focus on what I'm doing in my homelands.

The new system does mean that there is a little more to do when colonising, but it doesn't really sound as if it's going to make the system fun or interesting. Instead, it will mean that there's more incentive to pay attention to an aspect of the game that isn't fun or interesting. I already always choose native co-existence policy because it let's me ignore the colonising process as much as I can. This just feels like it's going to be more of the same, with optimal play being boring play.

I may be wrong. This may turn out to be awesome. It just feels off to me.
 
  • 20
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Will the AI actually pay for fort maintenance now? That's the thing that seems the most bonkers about the whole fort system as it stands because the player has to think of them very differently than the AI.

I question the point of maintenance anyway. Forts already have an opportunity cost of a building slot, so you already have something discouraging you from simply building them in every province. Perhaps a higher up front cost (+25-50%) would make more sense.
 
  • 8
  • 1
Reactions:
Simple question then, is it worth building them or not? Seems like a poor use of limited building slots to me.
The answer to that question, to me, is "Will it pay for itself before 1821?" And the answer is; it depends. The amount of money it saves you depends on the development of the province you build it in, so you'll only be building them in your most developed provinces (which are most likely to have spare building-slots.) With build-cost reductions, I'm sure I'll be building at least some, but since I don't know off-hand the formula for state-maintenance or the cost of those buildings, I couldn't go into more detail than it.

In the current build, I don't tend to to build them for the autonomy-reduction or the unrest, because by the time I can afford to build them autonomy isn't a problem (i.e. I have a lot of automatic autonomy-reduction already, and I can quite easily quash rebellions), and earlier they'd be more useful I don't have the money for them. Now that they'll start paying for themselves, that might change.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
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.

I really like this.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
I question the point of maintenance anyway. Forts already have an opportunity cost of a building slot, so you already have something discouraging you from simply building them in every province. Perhaps a higher up front cost (+25-50%) would make more sense.

Imagine a late-game nation with 100 level 8 forts. Do you want to siege that down? Because I certainly don't.
 
  • 11
  • 1
Reactions:
Oh wow, way to completely neuter two entire idea groups
Nope. It's a way to partially unwind the hatchet job that the Institution system did to the effectiveness of two idea groups' finishers.

(And if you were taking Exploration purely for the CB at the end, you're very strange.)
 
  • 9
  • 3
Reactions:
Thank you for making Grain not a useless trade good.
 
  • 16
Reactions:
Imagine a late-game nation with 100 level 8 forts. Do you want to siege that down? Because I certainly don't.
To be honest.... That doesn't sound ANY different than now. Late game, because the ai pays for no forts, every country has level 8 forts all over. It's the most annoying thing out.
They're changing it so that the AI now pays for forts so you might end up seeing less level 8 forts. High level forts are extremely expensive. Each level 8 fort now costs 2 ducats/month. Just having 8 forts spread out along gb or France or Spain will cost 16 ducats / month. You'll have to bring in some serious trade money if you still want to maintain all these forts, you're states and your army. And that's assuming you stay tiny where all you need is 8 forts to be fully fortified. As you grow, you'll be spending more and more on forts.

Currently, when i play to late game, if i don't destroy firts i can easily spend 100 ducats on forts just from all the level 2 to 8 forts I've acquired through conquests.

I think we'll need to wait to see how this change really affects fort spam. For players you might begin to see a few more forts since there are players that play with none... For ai you might start seeing a lot less since they now have to pay for it.
 
  • 6
Reactions:
According to forts will a fort in Elfsborg prevent Norweigian troops to stack up with Danish troops by land. Both sides can siege Elfsborg but can they walk past it to fight together in Halland.
 
Will there be a converter update for these new provinces?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Good to see continued updates and work on the update! Many of these changes will alter the balance, hopefully for the better.

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..
Wouldn't it make sense to keep it as it was previously? The more work the colonists does, the more people who come and the more people who come the more would move towards the colony, no?

Corruption is now not entirely 100% bad, as a country with 100 corruption will now get -20 unrest in their realm.
What is the justification for this? I don't get why this would bean effect of corruption. To me this seems and debase currency seem to be more vague that the fort systems were.

I asked this on Twitter, but never got a response.
After all of the communication being moved to Twitter and the confusing replies on why that was the case, I have given up on trying to understand how @Johan wants to communicate with the forum except for in dev diaries.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions: